> > On the other hand, nothing about a "closed place to chat" feels right to > me. As a volunteer contributor that serves as an "air traffic controller", > directing and introducing interested people in the Brazilian community to > Mozilla projects, I watch a lot of different places in order to know what's > going on and who's doing what. I am constantly talking to people that had > no idea about existing projects/forums inside Mozilla because those are > hard to discover. One of the greatest qualities about Mozilla is that not > only our products, but also our processes are completely open. Let's keep > it that way. I'm concerned that by hiding our decision making we're going > against our existing projects to ease the path for new contributors – and > by new I mean new to a project, not necessarily new to Mozilla –, and > making it harder for people to feel like they are part of the project. > > Generally agree with this, however in the wake of the Thunderbird leak and it's potential motivations (one of them being a lack of perceived ability to discuss the matter during the embargo), which created a lot of unwarranted FUD about the future of Thunderbird, I think this is something we need to look at. I'm strongly against maintaining a closed chat system on an ongoing basis as I feel like it's anathema to the values of openness and transparency that make Mozilla great, however, I do see the need to have the capability on a less-regular basis - specifically in response to particular events and announcements that require discretion, and would suggest one approach would be that closed chats only happen as needed, in response to specific communication needs, and are always hosted events focused on a particular sensitive topic, rather than just keeping a private "backroom" available at all times where it will be seen as some sort of private exclusive club.
-Stephanie _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
