No. She isn't entitled any “best whishes” or respect whatsoever when she's been draining Mozilla's money straight to her own pocket “to cover the needs of her family”. Parasitic behavior deserves shaming, that's it.
That implies fraud. Was Baker ever accused of that?
People are paid to manage organizations, which includes firing people. It's not a job failure necessarily. I do think Baker is/was overpaid.
IME, and in the view of many experts, it generally has a poor effect.
> When someone acts outside of the norms of the society they are shamed.
Are the norms so sacrosanct? How do we innovate or have dissent?
This is slightly unrelated to the point I was trying to make, but I don't think us commentors are entitled to make passes at her character or doubt her motives. Perhaps from your position it seems like an objective fact that Baker was engaging in morally dubious acts (I personally don't think so) but that still doesn't give you (or any of us!) a right to judge her. We do not know her personally so I don't think we have any right to shame her at all. That's just my opinion, I know its controversial, feel free to argue.
Argue is the wrond word there, it makes it seem like I'm silently judging you from a higher pedestal (though I suppose this entire comment gives off that impression) but if you have any questions feel free to ask me. Again this makes it seem like I'm in a position of superiority, I don't know of a better way to phrase it.