Also, and I hate to defend a homophobe here, but if we're going back to the details...
It all sprang up because he gave $1000 to the Prop 8 campaign for banning same sex marriage in California.
Scummy, to be sure, but it's not like he orchestrated the whole campaign or fully financed them. $1000 is barely enough to pay for one TV ad to play exactly one time on a local California TV station. I understand, yes, that when you add that to the rest of the donations, it was a juggernaut, but it still felt a little like punishing someone for having different politics. I also understand that it would be hard to work under someone like that knowing what his politics are, and questioning if that was going to impact fellow LGBT employees. Super valid reasons to be upset that he was put in the top leadership position.
His politics are shitty, to be sure, but a single $1000 donation definitely always seemed a little overblown to me. Especially since he chose to resign after just 11 days, while Mozilla had tried to convince him to stay on in a different role. No one in leadership roles stepped down over him, he made the choice to save the organization instead of himself. That at least showed some sense of humility. So I don't know, not the greatest guy, and his current trajectory with Brave hasn't been so great either, but he at least showed decorum in that situation.
However, that situation also put Mozilla on the defensive, having to put out a FAQ about how they weren't turning into an activist organization, or how you didn't have to ascribe to and agree on every political issue to work at Mozilla.
It was just bad business all around.
That's fair, but in that case you might just say "they likely profited handsomely off this venture" or something similar, because if you reach for dollar amounts like that, it can kind of undermine your point.