On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 6:32:04 PM UTC-6, Jim wrote:
> On 2014-04-16 17:44, Majken Connor wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:10 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > 
> 
> >> Thanks for responding.
> 
> >> 
> 
> >> 1) Why didn't they offer him the CEO position? Has Mozilla attempted 
> 
> >> to
> 
> >> persuade Brendan to speak publicly on this? What was his response?
> 
> >> 
> 
> > 
> 
> > Because he had just quit that position. "I don't want to be CEO 
> 
> > anymore."
> 
> > "Ok, how about if you be CEO instead?"
> 
> 
> 
> Do you even know what happened?
> 
> 
> 
> The Board withdrew their support.
> 
> 
> 
> Taking advantage of someone's weakness under pressure.
> 
> 
> 
> >> 2) Not blogging skills, but the content of the post was the straw that
> 
> >> broke the camel's back. Missteps prior to are justification. She 
> 
> >> should
> 
> >> have quelled this fire the second the "protest" began. And if it 
> 
> >> developed
> 
> >> further, reiterate the board, including her, stands by their 
> 
> >> appointment
> 
> >> and that doesn't require standing by his views outside Mozilla. A blog 
> 
> >> post
> 
> >> on her personal web site is next to nothing. The handling and response 
> 
> >> were
> 
> >> inadequate. But, she did take the time to write a lengthy blog post 
> 
> >> the day
> 
> >> he left. She was ready to take advantage of that. :-\
> 
> >> 
> 
> > 
> 
> > Because the people asking for Brendan's resignation weren't entirely
> 
> > baseless.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, of course they were baseless, as is your comment.
> 
> 
> 
> > They did have a valid point that people that don't know Brendan
> 
> > could have hard time trusting him.
> 
> 
> 
> 99% of Mozilla employees disagree with you.  Who do you rep.?
> 
> 
> 
> > Mitchell couldn't just say "no you guys
> 
> > are entirely wrong, we're not listening to you!!"
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, that is exactly what she should have done, and fired some.  Still 
> 
> has not happened.
> 
> 
> 
> > Also "quelling" the fire
> 
> > would have required squashing other people's freedom of speech.
> 
> 
> 
> This attitude is part of the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> > This
> 
> > happened very quickly. Mistakes were made. No doubt the longer blog 
> 
> > post
> 
> > was made after seeing how the previously handling of the situation 
> 
> > worked
> 
> > (or didn't work). Mitchell and Brendan are cofounders of Mozilla. They 
> 
> > have
> 
> > been friends for a long time. I can't for a moment believe Mitchell 
> 
> > would
> 
> > ever intentionally gain from Brendan's suffering. I'm sure that's also 
> 
> > part
> 
> > of why the blog post after he resigned was longer, because she must 
> 
> > feel
> 
> > awful.
> 
> 
> 
> Does that excuse revenge?
> 
> 
> 
> >> 3) By not standing by and defending someone who differs in opinion. By 
> 
> >> not
> 
> >> acting on information which should be private but forced to be public 
> 
> >> by
> 
> >> California law.
> 
> >> 
> 
> > 
> 
> > As an organization, and in general, Mozilla did stand by him. Only a 
> 
> > small
> 
> > number of people called for his resignation. Many others, including 
> 
> > several
> 
> > of our LGBTQ contributors supported Brendan continuing in the position.
> 
> > 
> 
> > Personal opinion here: Brendan wasn't a slam dunk choice before the
> 
> > controversy hit.
> 
> 
> 
> What would you know?
> 
> 
> 
> > I am much more excited about Chris Beard being named
> 
> > interim CEO than I was over Brendan. I have nothing against Brendan, 
> 
> > and I
> 
> > don't know him well enough to say if I think he'd have been a great CEO 
> 
> > for
> 
> > Mozilla. I think many of us were in that in between place, we didn't
> 
> > realize he was a candidate, we knew there was a search for an outside 
> 
> > CEO.
> 
> > We didn't have time to decide if we thought he was the right choice. I 
> 
> > do
> 
> > know Chris well enough to know he'll be amazing.
> 
> 
> 
> A Chris vs Brendan comparison is the last thing we need and will just 
> 
> create more trouble.  Keep you opinions to yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> > I know for my part, that
> 
> > contributed to me taking time before publicly (on facebook :-p ) 
> 
> > declaring
> 
> > support for Brendan.
> 
> 
> 
> Brendan had merit. You can't even judge merit.
> 
> 
> 
> > I waited to see how our LGBTQ contributors felt. But
> 
> > things were moving fast, and we didn't really have much time. Honestly, 
> 
> > I'm
> 
> > not 100% sure what we could have done better. We could have tried to
> 
> > organize social media so that we were sharing out our posts in support 
> 
> > of
> 
> > Brendan better. But all this is hindsight. If we'd been prepared for 
> 
> > this,
> 
> > sure, we could have done a bunch of things differently. But we weren't
> 
> > prepared. We didn't expect the controversy because to most of us there
> 
> > wasn't a controversy (we dealt with this 2 years ago). It's much faster 
> 
> > to
> 
> > just RT a call for a resignation than it is to take time to carefully 
> 
> > form
> 
> > an opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> Stop pretending you represent Mozilla.  If you want to express an 
> 
> opinion then make it clear that it is your own and that you have no clue 
> 
> about the Mozilla mission.
> 
> 
> 
> Jim

Thank you Jim
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Reply via email to