It's less about Eich and more about the fundamental rights of association that are being eroded in this country.
Employment is an association. I don't know how it gets more fundamental a human right than "I don't fucking like you, so I'm not going to give you my money to work for me." But somehow this has changed in America and a "job" is some thing the government controls, and you are just a steward of. Don't like felons? Tough shit - some areas now won't let you ask about it. Don't like gays? Too bad, hire him or else. Racist? Well, sorry - hire that other-race woman or else.
It's all bullshit, needless bullshit. Eich was a liability to Mozilla, period. It's not fair, he wasn't out proselytizing or burning crosses - sure. But he was a liability and Mozilla did not want to continue to employ him in that role. That should be their choice.
You can get blacklisted in this country for making a slightly off-color joke, or for "appropriating" a dance from another "culture". And yet we feel we need the government to step in and manage all employment in this country to an increasing degree.
Lol, you mean if people were free to choose to hire and associate with whomever they wish we would end up with a "bad society"? Lolwut?
Yes, we would end up in a good society - a free one. If people are assholes it's generally not conducive to business, and frankly it doesn't matter in the end anyway, it's a zero sum game.
Yes, I thought it through and it's the only tenable option. That and social pressure. Laws forcing you to retain douchebags like this guy are insane, completely irrational.
If a company starts firing people for e.g. supporting union organizations, good luck finding employees and good luck with the media shitstorm that goes your way.
Silly laws like California's could have put Mozilla in an impossible position.
By this line of "reasoning", if your CEO decides to run as mayor or get a new ballot initiative declaring some minority group as 3/5ths of a human or making it illegal for them to serve food due to being dirty (insert minority here)'s, then I guess the companies hands are tied and they can't fire him.
And in other news, AcmeCorp's CEO has come out and blathered another insane "political opinion". AcmeCorp's board of directors were last seen hurling themselves against the plate glass windows of their 38'th floor offices.
If you don't want to be penalized for your political opinions, don't run around spouting off about them.
Yes. They lied. It's a huge conspiracy and Anna Chapman is a poor victim, as are the other 9. Nevermind that Russia traded US spies for their spies. Oh, and the UK must have been in on it too.
Get a fucking grip, you sound ridiculous.
Or...maybe that's just what 'they' want us to think, right? Lolzers.
Shrug. If you're going to go all paranoid delusional on me and deny everything then I don't know what else to say. Maybe they are out to get you, who knows.
Lol, I see posts like this from people commenting on the latest Kardhazzian article. For some reason it makes people feel good to play the "irrelevant!" or "I don't care about that, pfft" cards.
You're so, like, above it all maaan. You sure put those silly Americans in their place!
Your theories, they are kooky. You should carefully type them (on an old typewriter, not on a computer/printer) in single spaced documents, smear them in feces, and mail them to people.
I suspect that the landlord getting to up rental rates when a tenant moves out may have a lot to do with this excessive behavior.
You're damn right it does, and good for the landlord. They can rent to Asshole A for $600/month and Asshole B will not find a place to live, or they can rent to Asshole B for $2500 a month and Asshole A won't have a place to live. Either way one asshole has a place to live and one doesn't, but in one case I make $1900 more a month - I know which I'd pick.
Damn right I'd gleefully evict some asshole paying $600 a month for an apartment that's worth $2800 a month, _especially_ when said asshole is subletting it and making $1000 a month on profit.
Fuck him, and good riddance - right out on the street with him. Hilarity ensues.
Predatory _landlord_ practices? So SF implemented these draconian policies that force landlords to rent their property at a fraction of their actual value, essentially subsidizing the renters, and it's the _landlords_ who are being predatory?
Still waiting for that painful downside to ".NET Lock-in" all you dweebs keep claiming. After over a decade..nope, still haven't seen it. Maybe it'll be in a few more years, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. It should be perfectly legal to fire anyone for any reason. What's amusing is that that's soooo crazy, right?
It's less about Eich and more about the fundamental rights of association that are being eroded in this country.
Employment is an association. I don't know how it gets more fundamental a human right than "I don't fucking like you, so I'm not going to give you my money to work for me." But somehow this has changed in America and a "job" is some thing the government controls, and you are just a steward of. Don't like felons? Tough shit - some areas now won't let you ask about it. Don't like gays? Too bad, hire him or else. Racist? Well, sorry - hire that other-race woman or else.
It's all bullshit, needless bullshit. Eich was a liability to Mozilla, period. It's not fair, he wasn't out proselytizing or burning crosses - sure. But he was a liability and Mozilla did not want to continue to employ him in that role. That should be their choice.
You can get blacklisted in this country for making a slightly off-color joke, or for "appropriating" a dance from another "culture". And yet we feel we need the government to step in and manage all employment in this country to an increasing degree.
Lol, that's actually a good point though I think Obama was as much of a tool as Eich. Obama got a pass because he's on "their side", though.
Could you repeat that, I couldn't hear you over all that rabble rousing...
Lol, you mean if people were free to choose to hire and associate with whomever they wish we would end up with a "bad society"? Lolwut?
Yes, we would end up in a good society - a free one. If people are assholes it's generally not conducive to business, and frankly it doesn't matter in the end anyway, it's a zero sum game.
Yes, I thought it through and it's the only tenable option. That and social pressure. Laws forcing you to retain douchebags like this guy are insane, completely irrational.
If a company starts firing people for e.g. supporting union organizations, good luck finding employees and good luck with the media shitstorm that goes your way.
Silly laws like California's could have put Mozilla in an impossible position.
Welcome to California, land of nutballs and lunatics. This law is untenable on its face. Companies must be able to hire and fire whomever they wish.
It's not at all a scary precedent - it's a mandatory one. California's law is insane, like much of California.
How are you supposed to run a business with a numb-nuts like this guy running around ruining your name?
By this line of "reasoning", if your CEO decides to run as mayor or get a new ballot initiative declaring some minority group as 3/5ths of a human or making it illegal for them to serve food due to being dirty (insert minority here)'s, then I guess the companies hands are tied and they can't fire him.
And in other news, AcmeCorp's CEO has come out and blathered another insane "political opinion". AcmeCorp's board of directors were last seen hurling themselves against the plate glass windows of their 38'th floor offices.
If you don't want to be penalized for your political opinions, don't run around spouting off about them.
Yes. They lied. It's a huge conspiracy and Anna Chapman is a poor victim, as are the other 9. Nevermind that Russia traded US spies for their spies. Oh, and the UK must have been in on it too.
Get a fucking grip, you sound ridiculous.
Or...maybe that's just what 'they' want us to think, right? Lolzers.
Shrug. If you're going to go all paranoid delusional on me and deny everything then I don't know what else to say. Maybe they are out to get you, who knows.
Lol, I see posts like this from people commenting on the latest Kardhazzian article. For some reason it makes people feel good to play the "irrelevant!" or "I don't care about that, pfft" cards.
You're so, like, above it all maaan. You sure put those silly Americans in their place!
And if they hadn't just done it a few years ago. We caught them (Anna Chapman et al.) but how many have we not caught?
Don't be a dumb asshole.
This is beyond plausible - it already fucking happened, you cynical hipster. Try educating yourself.
Yeah, it's not like the Russians _just got fucking busted_ for doing this.
Dipshit.
Aww, you little ARM guys are so cute arguing over which toy-architecture CPU is the latest greatest! Watch what happens over the next 2 years...
Your theories, they are kooky. You should carefully type them (on an old typewriter, not on a computer/printer) in single spaced documents, smear them in feces, and mail them to people.
Ahh, good. Maybe we should just confiscate everything over $1M that any person owns then, I mean based on your logic sounds reasonable.
I suspect that the landlord getting to up rental rates when a tenant moves out may have a lot to do with this excessive behavior.
You're damn right it does, and good for the landlord. They can rent to Asshole A for $600/month and Asshole B will not find a place to live, or they can rent to Asshole B for $2500 a month and Asshole A won't have a place to live. Either way one asshole has a place to live and one doesn't, but in one case I make $1900 more a month - I know which I'd pick.
Damn right I'd gleefully evict some asshole paying $600 a month for an apartment that's worth $2800 a month, _especially_ when said asshole is subletting it and making $1000 a month on profit.
Fuck him, and good riddance - right out on the street with him. Hilarity ensues.
No, they aren't evicting you if you own it, that would be where fines or other sanctions come into play.
Good way for landlords being ripped off by rent controls to evict renters, though. I like it!
Predatory _landlord_ practices? So SF implemented these draconian policies that force landlords to rent their property at a fraction of their actual value, essentially subsidizing the renters, and it's the _landlords_ who are being predatory?
Multiple cables... each one you add decreases the wait time to charge.
Lol, who gives a shit about that?
Still waiting for that painful downside to ".NET Lock-in" all you dweebs keep claiming. After over a decade..nope, still haven't seen it. Maybe it'll be in a few more years, right?