I used to live in Bahrain while my wife worked in oil and gas, and a lot of her colleagues had some... pretty different... views from us but we still got along. Hell, the country itself has a pretty significant Sunni / Shia divide, with employees being one or the other and they managed to work with each other just fine.
I think in general people should be able to work with others that they have significant differences in opinion with. Now, in tech, we've been privileged to be in a seller's (of labor) market, where we can exercise some selectivity in where we work, so it's certainly a headwind in hiring if the CEO is undesirable (for whatever reason), but plenty of people still will for the cause or the pay or whatever. You just have to balance whether the hiring problems the CEO may or may not cause are worth whatever else they bring to the table.
How could you expect those staff to work under and trust a CEO opposed to their very existence as equal members of society?
So yes I do expect staff to work under a ceo that is opposed to gay marriage, an idea that I would bet globally has a less than 50% popular support.
I don't think childless couples (of any gender) should get any societal advantages yet I have no problem working with people that disagree. Why has everything to be black-or-white, left-or-right, with us or against us? That's not a productive way to think about others.
Sure it is. I've lived and worked in the Middle East and in China. People do it all the time.
How can staff members feel trust and been seen as equals when they get fired to make place for someone that is already earning 70x their wage. All while tanking the company to new lows.
Brendan is the one that crossed a line.
So pretty much any law that is opposed by someone. Shop lifting shouldn't be legal because there are people who like free stuff. Curltailing the freedom of people who want free stuff improves society by protecting people's property.
Also, come on man. It's in really bad taste to compare stuff to the Holocaust. Nobody was being murdered here, it's not remotely the same.
Wikipedia also says he's Catholic. From what I understand, the Church's positions on such things have evolved at least somewhat since then. His views could have totally changed or evolved since then (can't find anything publicly myself).
It is like blaming me for giving $10 to an bump without checking what he was gonna do with it.
I had... complex but mostly positive feelings about Eich in the time I worked for him (indirectly), but I can state unequivocally that he's not someone who would bend his principles as a result of getting cornered at a party.
So I would guess $1000 was almost nothing to him. He is not really supporting anything by donating $1000.
I listened to him in a interview once, he really feel like a nice guy.
(Which for the record, is less important than physical freedom).
That makes it more difficult to create "free internet" type projects.
Come off it, as if he is the only one who can save us. Spare me.
