Eyes Above The Waves

Robert O'Callahan. Christian. Repatriate Kiwi. Hacker.

Sunday 6 April 2014

Responsible Self-Censorship

People may be wondering why I, as one of the most notorious Christians at Mozilla, have been silent during the turmoil of recent days. It is simply because I haven't been able to think of anything to say that won't cause more harm in the current environment. It is not because I am afraid, malicious, or suffering from a lack of freedom of speech in any way. As soon as I have the environment and the words to say something helpful, I will.

By "the current environment" I mean the situation where many of the culture warriors of all stripes are picking over every utterance looking for something to be angry against or something to fuel their anger against others.

Update Actually, right after posting that, I thought of something to say.

I have never loved the people of Mozilla as much as I do right now. With just a few exceptions, your commitment and grace under fire is inspiring and (in the old-fashioned sense) awesome. I'm glad I'm here for this.

Comments

Anonymous
"culture warriors of all stripes are picking over every utterance looking for something to be angry against or something to fuel their anger against others." Yeah, I'd agree with that one. I mean, I actually support their cause - I've got gay friends here in NZ who are happily married under our laws - but this bloody-minded witch hunt over Brendan's opposition to that cause is a disaster. It's an ugly spectacle that really does a lot of damage to the LGBT cause - it makes supporters look petty and vindictive, taking a stance that it's not just enough to win, but anyone who opposes you must be utterly destroyed. It's really not a good look.
Robert
In case someone tries to read my post as an attack on a particular group: I meant what I wrote about "all stripes". Some LGBT opponents are looking just as bad, to me. Key thing is to remember, or at least hope, that the haters in each group are a minority of the group. That's certainly true among the Christians I know. When we choose to understand a group through its most hateful members, we are choosing to become haters ourselves. So, although I'm angry about what some pro-LGBT people have done, I refuse to let that color my view of the whole movement.
Anonymous
Oh, certainly, many of the anti-LGBT supporters can be appalling - I just haven't seen very many of them chiming in on this particular drama. Possibly they're smart enough to see that all they need to do is stay out of the way, and let the pros score a huge own-goal...
Anonymous
It's funny, in a twisted sort of way - despite being opposed to his views, this fiasco leaves me far better disposed to Brendan (whom I've never met) than to the people supposedly espousing the same views I hold dear.
njn
"Notorious Christians". Heh, I like it.
timdream
I don't know. I have mix feeling about this. People are entitled to express their ideas anywhere with reasonable assumption of impact on the entire organization. We shouldn't be afraid of speaking out just because a statement *might* be twisted by the press, or anyone else. I am reading David here, calling people shout out on Twitter, basically "mobs" that brings Brendan down. https://medium.com/p/7645a4bf8a2 And Mark here on we have exposed too much "Mozilla" for people who doesn't understand us and thus leave us vulnerable. https://commonspace.wordpress.com/2014/03/30/mozilla-is-messy/ I hope I am wrong, but I am reading a trend here where people are using this as an example to ask advocates to "raise their concern internally" so the effect won't erroneously (I admit) "enlarged by vicious presses and reporters". I see this as a slippery slope of Mozilla self-censorship here. As we enters uncharted territories of Mobile and Cloud Services, I can only fell the debate of the core Mozilla issues (instead of, say, LGBT issues) will be more heated than ever. Take Discovery Tiles, or our partner relationship on B2G project, for example. It's only a matter of time before we need to contain another incident that could potentially hurt us. We would lost things unique that makes Mozilla, i.e. openess, honesty, and inclusiveness, if we need to settle anything *internally* first. What happened to Brendan was tragic, and I am deeply sadden about it too. But I don't think we will grow from it if we ended up applying self-censorship to ourselves.
Robert
We both wish the world was different but that doesn't make it different. When speaking out hurts our mission, I think I am obliged to not speak out.
timdream
:roc, I am not suggesting you are wrong on this particular instance and timing. Your words carries weight and I would not comment on this issue now if I were you too. What I worry is that Mozilla will eventually become a place where people can't fell comfortable of speak out on _anything_ publicly (e.g. mailing lists) without going through the same discussion in private first (e.g. Yammer or offline chat in office kitchens). In such setting, mailing list "discussions" will be merely a rubber stamp to reaffirm what has done in secret by few elite, "in harmony".
Robert
Right. We'll have to work together to make sure that doesn't happen.
Till Schneidereit
At one of the townhall meetings, Mozilla's PR people explictly told everyone to post as much as they wanted and whichever opinion they held on this whole saga. Without checking with anyone. Seeing how different the opinions are that people voice in public, it doesn't seem to me like people are afraid of going public first. I think we're doing pretty well on this front.
timdream
Till, you are indeed working at the bright side of Mozilla :) I am very happy to share with you and :roc on many of the outstanding issues around B2G in private. (Yes; I am self-sensorship myself too.)
Anonymous
“Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.” (Proverbs 6:24 KJV; or in the modern paraphrase “Don’t argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”)