Huh? We don't need to stop predicting yet; it hasn't been long enough yet to draw any conclusions about how he's guiding Mozilla in regards to this issue.
As for IAC, I don't understand your comment at all. Why would IAC penalize employees whose personal beliefs disagree with this public action? There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe that a company requires all of its employees to hold the same beliefs that the company is publicly promoting.
Why would IAC penalize employees whose personal beliefs disagree with this public action? There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe that a company requires all of its employees to hold the same beliefs that the company is publicly promoting.
You just made my point. Isn't a CEO also an employee? Just because he is the most powerful figure in the company doesn't mean he has to hold the same beliefs that the company is publicly promoting, which is equality and openness to all as a private citizen. He will have to hold the same belief as Mozilla as a CEO. Mozilla and its community accepts there are people who believe and disagree on marriage equality.
Huh? We don't need to stop predicting yet; it hasn't been long enough yet to draw any conclusions about how he's guiding Mozilla in regards to this issue.
Set a deadline. I'll give you a month to talk about this. Then? What's next? Exactly. It won't change anything. He's the CEO. He won't step down. Mozilla will continue to function. People will keep an eye on Mozilla. That's it. So tell me, what good is your prediction? More articles and speculations and rants and wars?
Why should you or anyone draw any conclusion? What conclusion? What good is your prediction to this non-stop no-win situation? Just as I said I can find a pro-life person to manage the company will receive the same doubt: what good is you or anyone continue to make "prediction"? If your prediction only causes more useless non-stop repeating arguments, that kind of prediction is just noise simply because nothing new will ever come out.
I get the feeling you haven't actually bothered to read anything I've said on this subject, because you're arguing as though I'm calling for Brendan Eich's head, when in fact I've said multiple times that I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and wait to see how he actually acts, rather than draw conclusions based on a personal action he took 6 years ago.
As for IAC, I don't understand your comment at all. Why would IAC penalize employees whose personal beliefs disagree with this public action? There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe that a company requires all of its employees to hold the same beliefs that the company is publicly promoting.