So, who will stop using Firefox?
- Thread starter Wormbo
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Did a BUF argument really just stoop to the level of "I know you are, but what am I"?
Next up..."my dad can beat up your dad!"
I think we're done with this thread.
Next up..."my dad can beat up your dad!"
I think we're done with this thread.
Btw keeping stuff in memory is not something inherent to javascript and people should stop crediting javascript with that. Some browsers do keep local memory of stuff even what you wrote, without javascript, until you explicitly reload the page. So those kind of arguments are bs, just saying.
No strawman from me, but thanks for playing. Fact is that Christians have less and less influence these days in these types of situations, and perhaps they should. Although the issue of gay marriage is far from settled in the US, it makes little sense to me that gays and their supporters would go into such a vicious attack mode against Eich all because he contributed to a policy that a simple majority of Californians voted in favor of.
Imagine if this had been a similar broad-based tech organization filled with devout Christians who removed a guy from the CEO position all because he gave $1000 to some pro gay marriage effort. You can bet your sweet bippy there would be a a lawsuit. There would also likely be an eventual Supreme Court case on this action, claiming it to be unconstitutional. Since no person in such an organization could claim religious persecution or other infringement, I can see the SCOTUS opinions coming down 9-0, unconstitutional.
Since Eich took no direct action against gays (from the linked correspondence in this thread, he actually supported the company's pro-gay policies). Mozilla's business is broad-based (does not target directly on one social or political demographic) which means there was no professional or business-related reason for ousting the man. It was all personal and was conducted in an extremely vicious manner for his actions taken outside of the work place and on his own time and resources. The man resigned under enormous pressure and may actually have a case for a wrongful termination suit, although I am unsure if a such a resignation qualifies under wrongful termination laws in California (there have been a few successful cases in other states).
I have no idea why I’m replying to you but here goes:
It honestly surprises you that gay people would be upset at a person donating to the side that opposes them? Suppose I donated to Proposition 1337, which restricts all Crotales from posting on BuF. (This is a real proposition and I humbly submit it before you all. Donations accepted.) Should I be surprised when this does not engender your love and admiration?
What does that even mean? How is contributing to Prop 8 “no direct action against gays”? Are we having the same conversation, or are you just typing random words now?
This might be strictly factual but distorts the truth. Their products are reflections of a distinct philosophy. They advocate for Internet freedom. They champion the cause of open source. Mozilla is a political organization as much as a software company. They don’t make just any software. It’s social equality software.
Edit: And a boycott costs them money, so there’s that too, if you prefer to take the stone-hearted capitalist approach. I bet you do!
It honestly surprises you that gay people would be upset at a person donating to the side that opposes them? Suppose I donated to Proposition 1337, which restricts all Crotales from posting on BuF. (This is a real proposition and I humbly submit it before you all. Donations accepted.) Should I be surprised when this does not engender your love and admiration?
What does that even mean? How is contributing to Prop 8 “no direct action against gays”? Are we having the same conversation, or are you just typing random words now?
This might be strictly factual but distorts the truth. Their products are reflections of a distinct philosophy. They advocate for Internet freedom. They champion the cause of open source. Mozilla is a political organization as much as a software company. They don’t make just any software. It’s social equality software.
Edit: And a boycott costs them money, so there’s that too, if you prefer to take the stone-hearted capitalist approach. I bet you do!
@everyone
You have reached the turning point. This is it. The moment of truth. The one true religion is revealed now:
JOHNDOEISM
JohnDoeism is a streamlined religion where basicaly everyone alive is a sinner but to repent and go to heaven you don't need to spend time in church and preach the word to other people and pray and hate groups of different sexual orientations or ethnicities and all that crap other religions require you to do. All you have to do is click the button I offer you and donate all your money to the all-powerful and all-knowing JohnDoe. Thanks to a javascript program, your name is stored in the ultimate heaven database and your space in heaven is reserved. More info here.
Click now and save yourself!
Last edited:
What I mean is that he took no action to invoke or enact anti-gay policies in the work place, which is the venue in question. He did, however, support putting pro-gay policies in place at the office, did he not?
Then they ought to support freedom of speech, which is an imperative given the method of communication that is the internet.
I am not a boycotter. I might just not visit a business if I feel they have treated me badly as a customer, but this event has no bearing on me personally, so no boycotting for me here.
As an addendum, I am placing here this quote by Mitchell Baker of Mozilla:
Mitchell Baker said:
Equality for all? Equality for all includes a wide range of views and beliefs, with the facilitation of inclusion of all of those views and beliefs, not just cherrypicking the ones you personally support. In other words, Mozilla is currently talking out of its ass. Well, Baker is, since her words are meant to represent the company in this statement.
They failed to listen, engage and be guided by their community? With whom does Baker think makes up her community? She evidently believes the Mozilla community (which includes the Firefox userbase) all supports gays. Maybe it is just me, but accepting all views means just that: accepting all views, even when they contradict your own. You can express disagreement, but to oust the guy because he made a contribution outside of the place of work and away form his contractual duties, is not representative of supporting an open community or society.
Seriously, how many pages will this take? And can't you guys come up with better topics here at BuF OT? And when the topic is nothing special, can't you even try to understand other people's PoW and step back a bit on personal attacks, even if you instinctively reject what you're reading? Or even better, try to see more than 2 sides to a discussion.
Because you know what? Religion pseudo-arguments and the right for gay people to go on with their lives, doesn't invalidate the fact this is an obvious charade. The media, opinion-makers, etc... love to pick up divisive topics and rub salt in wounds, keep the hatred within the society alive. Keep people distracted and focused on drama, instead of on the big picture and stuff that really matters.
Or, for example, do you think anyone in the West really cares about gay rights in Russia? That was obviously to troll Putin. So was Pussy Riot spammed during weeks in a row in the media. Fuck all this manipulation B.S.!
I intended to make a much more elaborate post, but those SDR's and ham radios got me interested.
Yes, the guy resigned. There's some "gay mafia" out there according to Bill Maher.
Because you know what? Religion pseudo-arguments and the right for gay people to go on with their lives, doesn't invalidate the fact this is an obvious charade. The media, opinion-makers, etc... love to pick up divisive topics and rub salt in wounds, keep the hatred within the society alive. Keep people distracted and focused on drama, instead of on the big picture and stuff that really matters.
Or, for example, do you think anyone in the West really cares about gay rights in Russia? That was obviously to troll Putin. So was Pussy Riot spammed during weeks in a row in the media. Fuck all this manipulation B.S.!
I intended to make a much more elaborate post, but those SDR's and ham radios got me interested.
Yes, the guy resigned. There's some "gay mafia" out there according to Bill Maher.
When the Internet is gone, Bitcoin will be worth less than the paper it is printed on.
Benfica: As far as I can tell, it's not a "gay mafia". I'd actually go as far and say that most of the popular outrages against a wide number of topics are staged by straight white Americans who take political correctness way too far.
Think about it the next time a pre-schooler gets suspended for pretending to hold a pistol by making a gesture.
Think about it the next time a pre-schooler gets suspended for pretending to hold a pistol by making a gesture.
Attachments
Last edited:
Time for the witchhunt to turn around 180° and target Sam Yagan, the co-founder of OkCupid...
http://uncrunched.com/2014/04/06/the-hypocrisy-of-sam-yagan-okcupid/