strafer32

That good to hear that he's still been active, thanks.

You ask in what way are your comments abusive. I believe you to be trolling because of your style of argument. You say things like [1]:

"Gert (and his supporters), do you also hate women, blacks and jews as much as you hate gays, and do you agree with Brendan Eich’s support of Patrick J. Buchanan and Ron Paul?"

In that entire comment you bring up unrelated issues involving US politicians as if trying to direct supporters of Mozilla and Brendan of being supporters of that view. People discussing with you then have to address points like that or be seen as supporting it. It's a classic trolling technique to do this.

I also find statements like the following abusive [2]:

"Apparently the people who warned me that you had such a thick skull that no outside information could get through and affect your thought processes were correct, and that makes me sad, because I had more faith in you."

In that comment you bring up the Mormon religion which I have no idea what that has to do with Mozilla or the Brendan Eich saga. Again, classic troll misdirection.

[1] http://blog.gerv.net/2014/04/your-ire-is-misdirected/#commen... [2] http://blog.gerv.net/2014/04/your-ire-is-misdirected/#commen...

I have not badmouthed the new CEO Mozilla at all. This is a thread about the new CTO. Note that I don't criticize the new CTO for his religious or other beliefs. I criticize him for not having the people skills to perform his job.

Given the age of your account and the contents of your comments I don't think you're one to throw stones.

cpeterso got the idea from other Mozilla employees. The "he as offered to stay as CEO" grew legs when employees started responding on the governance newsgroup to people complaining about the firing. One person (Yoric I think) said he was offered a position. Then it grew to offered to stay as CEO. Then it grew to "Brendan even got angry about being asked to stay on" or some such statement. It's a classic case of incremental additions to an originally incorrect statement.

Brendan set the record straight and after that the official Mozilla line was clarified. The FAQ was updated to be clearer after Brendan made those comments.

Are you also the Don Hopkins being abusive and trolling on the comment threads of Gerv Markham's blog [1]?

[1] http://blog.gerv.net/2014/04/your-ire-is-misdirected/

I'm familiar with the governance structure of Mozilla. I'm not a distinguished engineer or anything, but familiar enough. There are employees parroting that Brendan is still has an important position in the structure. Brendan's comment implies he does not consider that the case.

He may be but as he says himself, that's not much involvement: http://dutherenverseauborddelatable.wordpress.com/2014/04/07...

He does not know otherwise and is mistaken. When Brendan's comment dispelling the rumour that he'd been offered to remain as CEO it was brought up in the Mozilla governance newsgroup and other places. Mitchell Baker clarified that he was not asked to stay on as CEO but was asked to stay on in another, lower level, position. Unfortunately some employees still repeat the false claim.

Andreas is not a great choice. His people skills are terrible. They are so bad that he no longer writes his own emails to employees. They have to go through a PA to make sure they have a human element.

The @RealAndreasGal twitter account that was recently deleted was so amusing because the things that it said were exactly on point. Same with the 'ShitGalSays' Tumblr account which is still around: http://shitgalsays.com/

Andreas is strongly pro-whatever partners want in Firefox OS. Expect DRM and other forms of lockdown to start appearing under his rule. He has no interest in the Mozilla mission.