[BrendanEich]

I was executive sponsor of Rust, which Graydon Hoare was doing as a personal project while working with me on ES4. Rob Sayre, JS team manager, agreed Rust should be an official project, so Graydon went full time on Rust at Mozilla. This was in 2008.

Later, others notably Niko Matsakis and Patrick Walton (apologies for leaving yet other folks’ names out) took Rust to 1.0.

Mitchell didn’t know what Rust was until I explained it, wasn’t CEO when we made it an official project, but was CEO for this:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/programming-language-rust-mozi...

[bakchodi]

Holy shit, this is actually Eich. Comment deserves more attention

Huge fan, you were pushed out unfairly - it's wild that you were fired for donating money to a vote that passed. It was a normal and popular opinion at the time.

[COGlory]

Brendan, I'm a big fan of a lot of your work, but I really think it's a poor look commenting in this thread at all. Most folks on HN are well aware of Mitchell's record, and those that aren't...well it's willful ignorance on their part.

[cwaffles]

Why is this a poor look? I was not aware of Brendan's involvement with Rust, nor the effect of the firings on the Rust team.

[COGlory]

I think it comes off as petty to punch down, and wanted to let Mr. Eich know (out of respect) in case he didn't realize it. But if he realizes it and doesn't care, or just disagrees, that's his decision.

[BrendanEich]

Punching down implies I’m up. How do you figure that? I’m not at Mozilla, not paying myself a seven figure salary, not ever engaging with the Davos set.

In any event, my comment laid out salient bits Rust history, which however much you might not like them, do not “punch” anyone.

[COGlory]

>How do you figure that?

You're a chief executive of a successful web technology and browser organization, while it looks as though Baker is being removed from the one you previously left.

I have no issue with the Rust facts, just that the context makes it look like you're being petty by further highlighting Baker's failure in a thread about what is effectively her removal, and I thought maybe you didn't realize that and would like to know. If you know and don't care, or disagree, then just disregard me.

>I’m not at Mozilla, not paying myself a seven figure salary, not ever engaging with the Davos set.

Mozilla's a dying organization kept on life support by Google and playing make-believe hero of the free web these days. Certainly tough to get much lower than that.

[BrendanEich]

You are assuming facts not in evidence or provably false per public IRS 990 forms:

1. Mitchell was not as far as I know removed.

2. She has extracted over $20M gross pay including bonuses for the last several years. I’ll do the exact math later.

Let’s see how much her comp goes down in this year’s IRS Form 990, which will come out at the earliest in late 2025.

3. Mozilla has a ton of cash in the bank while Brave is still building a new business model. To say I’m doing better in any financial sense is cheeky. If you use Brave, thanks for your support.

Last thing: Mozilla will take years to die, and it could perdure as an NGO, even after Firefox. Don’t assume it will die quickly. We are all dying, in this world.

[wolverine876]

You are only getting Brendan's story, and why is Brendan going out of his way to attack Mitchell Baker? It strongly implies some powerful drive besides sharing information.

[archerx]

Why are you fighting against facts from people that were there and why are you white knighting the person who has destroyed firefox’s marketshare?

[wolverine876]

Whatever white knighting is, I'm interested in the truth, in the dangers of Internet mobs, and in fairness to anyone (including you). All are essential. Look at what our world has become as people disparage all that.

> the person who has destroyed firefox’s marketshare?

One aspect of that mob mentality: You skipped past having evidence and reasoning for that assertion; it's just assumed. And then you act out in anger that anyone would question the mob's assumptions.

[BrendanEich]

I did not attack Mitchell.

[wolverine876]

Maybe there is some misunderstanding here (and I was surprised to see it): You took the time to post a comment that,

1) Reduces Mitchell's role in supporting Rust

2) Emphasizes Mitchell's role in the layoffs / reduction of Rust.

What was your point? If I misunderstood, my apologies.

[BrendanEich]

Don’t ignore context. The comment to which my first comment above replied implied that Mitchell (for Mozilla) was due credit for Rust.

Your (1) is still planting a falsehood: Mitchell’s role when I sponsored Rust was not CEO, she did not have to approve or reject Rust, but she did assent to my advice that we make Rust an official project.

This is not an attack, it’s simply what happened. You are the one who keeps concern trolling, or whatever it is you are doing, to give Mitchell undue credit or to shield her from anything that could be taken as criticism.