On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Robert Kaiser <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] schrieb:
>
>>> Frankly one reason we probably have more volunteers than the Red Cross is
>>> because of the lack of formalities.
>>
>>
>> As Janet pointed out, the Red Cross has many more volunteers than Mozilla.
>> Since we're intentionally growing the size of our community to approach the
>> size of their volunteer base and since we have a range of contribution
>> opportunities that go beyond coding, I think the Red Cross is a more useful
>> model for us to be looking at than open source projects.
>
>
> Yes and no. Most of the contributions to our project need way less legal
> framework, IMHO, and actually some of the wording of this contributor
> agreement fall into exactly the category of what would make me turn around
> and run away if I was only a casual contributor.
> If I'd volunteer with the Red Cross, I'd much more receiving for such an
> agreement as I'd be quite likely to be working in direct contact with people
> the organization interacts with and would be seen by those as a
> representative of the organization.
> Those assumptions do not hold true for casual contributors to Mozilla.

Like Robert points out there are some significant differences between
volunteering for the Red Cross and being a volunteer for Mozilla. Red
Cross volunteers are often on the front line working in an equal
capacity to the very few paid chapter or national staff that may be
involved in a disaster.

Here are some takeaways from the Red Cross Volunteer Handbook:
"Volunteers are indispensable and are how the American Red Cross
accomplishes its
mission. They shall be extended the right to be given meaningful
assignments, the right to be treated as equal co-workers, the right to
effective supervision, the right to full
involvement and participation and the right to recognition for work done."

"Volunteers may be involved in all programs and activities of the
organization. Volunteers and employees are partners in implementing
the mission and programs of the American Red Cross. Volunteers and
employees have equal and complementary roles to play."

Even for our long term contributors, I do not always think volunteers
and employees are partners in implementing the mission and programs of
Mozilla. I think input is allowed but at the end of the day employees
are drivers for most decisions and there are conversations and
information that is kept inside the corporate silo.

Now let me say that I do think there are a good number of employees
who treat contributors as equal and try to be inclusive, but I still
think we have these silos that the Red Cross does not have.

For me, it seems like this agreement is only advantageous for Mozilla
the organization and not for the contributor. In the case of the Red
Cross it seems like their agreements are advantageous for everyone
because it outlines the rights and things contributors can expect from
the Red Cross.

Mind you, as you pointed out existing contributors would not need to
agree to this so I’m still unsure why this would be beneficial for
future contributors but not useful for existing contributors.

Finally I still have been unable to find any other Open Source
projects that require this kind of an agreement to contribute.  Also
how would this agreement work for contributors that contribute as a
downstream partner submitting a patch upstream to Mozilla? Would we
really require downstream who do one-off or episodic contributions to
agree to this?
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Reply via email to