Hi David — I’m quite supportive of the general goal of clarifying the social contract that we have with each other (assuming a bit that that’s part of the motivation here).
This document reads like a legal document, not a social contract. Let’s find a way to tweak the language, the framing, etc. so that it’s not as corporate sounding. When reading it I feel like i’m working through a terms of use document, not being welcomed and understanding how I’ll work with this new and inspiring community. For example, it feels very weird to have a non-signed agreement, and to put the onus on the volunteer to let us know that they want to end the agreement. In reality volunteers just stop showing up. I would also suggest that an important part of the social contract between Mozilla and volunteers is to be explicit about how the organization will treat volunteers, how staff will treat volunteers, and how existing volunteers will treat new volunteers. That to me feels like at least as important as telling people that they can’t misrepresent themselves. I’d also like to suggest that we have a more explicit set of goals for this document — what need is it responding to, how do we know it’s “doing its job”, etc. —david _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
