These search deals aren't with the governments of these countries. Just like in the US, people in different regions prefer different services. Those happen to be the preferred services in those countries. The previous Google deal was more hypocritical because we stopped tailoring the default to the best options for people in those regions. Our mission is to provide an open internet for *all.* That includes users in China and Russia. Giving users in those countries the best experience possible is in line with our values and it supports the free exchange of information, which is a mighty tool in empowering oppressed people.
Also, I think it's a bit unfair that you are saying this is hypocritical simply because those business are in those countries. You should at least have some evidence that the companies themselves are supporting the governments. We have volunteers and contributors from those countries, just because they are in those countries, or from those countries, doesn't mean they don't support an open internet, and it doesn't mean they support government injustice anymore than being in the US means you support government injustice here. Boycotts should never be the first tactic for change, it makes an enemy out of the best person to help you bring about change, they just happen to be the easiest tactic to execute. Working with and supporting companies within those countries is the best way to bring about change. So as I said, unless there is evidence that these companies *support* the government suppression of its citizens rather than being victims themselves, then I don't think it's hypocritical at all. On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Adam Porter <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sunday, November 23, 2014 10:47:07 PM UTC-6, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > > The question of whether Mozilla should make deals with Yandex and > > Baidu is a reasonable one. > > I appreciate your being open to the discussion. > > > But it's worth noting that Mozilla has had search deals in the past > > with both Yandex and Baidu, prior to 2014. Which means that Brendan's > > tenure as CEO isn't relevant to the Yandex and Baidu deals. So it > > would be great if any subsequent discussion in this thread could focus > > on Yandex and Baidu -- as per the subject line -- and not on Brendan. > > I was not aware of those earlier deals. There is probably a lot I'm not > aware of, being an outside observer, and that's one of the reasons I have > brought this up here. I would like to better understand the situation, and > if it's justifiable--arguably, of course--to understand why. > > However, I disagree that having had earlier deals with them makes the Eich > ordeal irrelevant. (Not that I want to bring him into things for the sake > of reigniting that issue--I respect him and his desire to move on, and I > myself wrote on this forum calling for people to move on for the sake of > Mozilla's mission.) To me, having made such deals before that happened > makes the hypocrisy seem like a deeper problem within Mozilla that's been > going on for longer than previously realized. > > > (If you really want to discuss Brendan's tenure as CEO, you could do > > that in another thread. Conflating two different issues in a single > > thread will likely reduce the quality of the discussion.) > > No, that's not the point I am bringing up. However, while it's not the > focus of this issue, it is relevant to this issue; it informs our > discussion of this issue--the issue being Mozilla acting contrary to its > stated mission, principles, and values. > _______________________________________________ > governance mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance > _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
