I am not sure if this is true, but it seems that when things have been moved "to community" there hasn't been a transition plan that has set the community group (vs org group) up for success. What I mean is that, it seems like Mozilla has said "these are the resources we can spare" rather than saying "ok you need this amount of time to get these leadership structures in place, and you'll need x amount of mentoring."
That could just be an issue of poor communication though. I'm currently helping transition the Dev Derby contest to a community run project and everyone has been awesome. Of course that takes much lower resources than a software project. It also takes longer to get up on your feet than most people think. We seem to have a short attention span in this industry. Yes, once something *has* momentum if it doesn't swim in a certain amount of time, then it'll sink. But it takes most things at least a year to start gaining that momentum, as well as a lot of support from interested partners. I think Persona also has an advantage in that while it's not perfect, I'd rather use it than anything else, and I know many Mozillians who feel the same way. When Thunderbird or SeaMonkey were transitioned to community, many people had already decided to use a different product. One thing I'd recommend is that we really make it known who is now in charge of the project, which volunteers we can go to to offer help, and also ask for it. Then it won't be such a black box. Name the names and give the new leadership team some faces, so that it's obvious there are still real people working on the project. On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Rubén Martín <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi, > > Even this time there was a (at least for me) clear article about the > changes > < > http://identity.mozilla.com/post/78873831485/transitioning-persona-to-community-ownership > > > on Persona, most people I read or that have pinged me think the project > is dead and there is no point on keep promoting it any more. > > Quoting Daring Fireball > <http://daringfireball.net/linked/2014/03/09/persona>: > > > "Transitioning to Community Ownership" is Mozilla-speak for "It's > > dead, Jim." > > Why people have this perception? Is it accurate? Can we do something to > change it? > > From the article I understand this is just a change on ownership, from > full time employees to volunteers (including some employees), but it > seems people don't see it like that or don't have faith on these kind of > announcements. > > Maybe can we show successful examples on ownership changes from > employees to volunteers at Mozilla to prove them wrong. > > Regards. > > PS: The use of "Community" in the article it's probably unfortunate > since employee ownership is also community ownership ;) > > -- > Rubén Martín [Nukeador] > Mozilla Reps Mentor > http://www.mozilla-hispano.org > http://twitter.com/mozilla_hispano > http://facebook.com/mozillahispano > > > _______________________________________________ > governance mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance > > _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
