I suspect that "being right", at least in the eyes of a lot of people not actively in the "mob" certainly made it much easier for this to happen and thus I don't see any clear "People from the Internet get what they want" precedent.
It's a large group lobbying a nonprofit to persuade it to have someone who represents the ideals they supposedly uphold. That Mozilla is a company that shouldn't stand for X political position is something lots of people agree with. That the CEO is the company face and can be held to a different standard than an ordinary employee is clear to a larger group than just activists for cause X (even if some large group on HN don't seem to grasp it).
For example, some movement to force the CEO of company X take a positive position in favor of political cause Y would have a lot harder time because it would seem much less reasonable to a larger group.
It's a large group lobbying a nonprofit to persuade it to have someone who represents the ideals they supposedly uphold. That Mozilla is a company that shouldn't stand for X political position is something lots of people agree with. That the CEO is the company face and can be held to a different standard than an ordinary employee is clear to a larger group than just activists for cause X (even if some large group on HN don't seem to grasp it).
For example, some movement to force the CEO of company X take a positive position in favor of political cause Y would have a lot harder time because it would seem much less reasonable to a larger group.