Check the feedback. People are boycotting Firefox due to the message communicated by Mitchell in her blog post.
Dismissing people's feedback, stating they will not be using Firefox, as not being a boycott is not constructive. They will just raise the volume. Is that what you want? To stick to the reportedly misinterpreted message and dam the consequences? Mitchell's blog post is widely quoted in the media. It is no longer possible to dismiss people's interpretation of the blog post as 'misinformation and/or outright lies' because we know how lots of people interpret it. It's damaging. Why has it not been taken down? Telling people they are misreading it when no attempt has been made to clarify it just communicates contempt. 'We’re committed to free speech.' Who made you the authority on what the Mozilla community stands for and how it's interpreted? I expected people to leave their exclusion issues at the door. Those who can't are not welcome. If you do not accept this then there is no point in have participation rules. If there are rules to help us all get along then we are entitled to enforce them and exclude people who cross the line. Jim -------------------------------------------- On Tue, 4/8/14, Michael Connor <[email protected]> wrote: Subject: Re: Goodbye Firefox and Mozilla! To: "Jim Taylor" <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "Nicholas Nethercote" <[email protected]>, [email protected] Date: Tuesday, April 8, 2014, 5:36 PM Jim, I’m not sure if you’re trying to be constructive here. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and reply, but if you’re really just trying to attack people, I’d suggest that you’re not going to achieve much. On Apr 8, 2014, at 7:36 PM, Jim Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well there is are 'mass boycott's of a company's primary product' caused by CEO Mitchell's blog post and this 'certainly counts as a major problem -- they have to act'. Yet there has been no action and the blog post is still there, and Mitchell has not resigned. First, Mitchell isn’t the CEO. Second, I’ve yet to see any evidence of a major boycott directly based on any of her posts, though there’s certainly a great deal of anger in some circles based on misinformation and/or outright lies. > A number of employees have contributed to a major problem and yet there has been no action. We’re committed to free speech. With that commitment we have to accept that not everyone will toe the line at all times. That’s difficult to imagine in the context of most companies, but Mozilla is not most companies. Most companies wouldn’t have appointed Brendan as CEO, given the possibility of controversy. It cuts both ways. > A large number of employees and members of the community have failed to abide by the participation guidelines and leave their issues at the door, and this is destroying the community, yet there has been no action. Can you provide some examples? I’d be happy to follow up with individuals to help them improve. — Mike _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
