On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2015-05-22 9:14 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> On 2015-05-22 7:38 PM, Adam Roach wrote: >> >> On 5/22/15 17:59, Mike Connor wrote: >> >> Can you name an example that would actually be widely >> controversial? >> >> >> Perhaps the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic -- I'd have to >> brush up on >> Moroccan politics to be sure. >> >> >> OK, so let's say that someone living in that region wants to be >> identified as living in SADR. Why is that not OK? And why is it up >> to us to decide that? And why would Mozilla care if the said >> individual wants to be identified as living in the SADR or in Morocco? >> >> If not, I don't think this is a material concern. >> >> >> Can you predict the entire worldwide political landscape for the >> rest of >> the lifetime of the project? >> >> >> Nobody can, but what is the point of this question? >> >> There are some very plausible, very near-term futures where an >> alternate >> government that currently controls parts of what are widely >> recognized >> as Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Nigeria begins to establish diplomatic >> relations with other countries. It isn't hard to believe that, >> much like >> the gradual diplomatic acceptance of the PRC in the '50's and >> '60's, >> such an entity might gain recognition by a non-trivial >> percentage of UN >> member states. >> >> And that? That would be controversial. >> >> >> It seems like you're optimizing for a different goal than some >> others in this thread: avoiding making controversial decisions, and >> your solution is to hand that off to another organization (the ISO.) >> >> Let me just talk about one of the most controversial cases for a >> second: ISIL, since you've mentioned it up-thread. Let's say that >> there are people who self-identify as ISIL citizens, and they would >> like to be part of the Mozilla community. What is the harm in >> allowing that individual to self-identify as such for the purposes >> of their Mozilla contributions? >> >> I think this debate simply boils down to what goal we're trying to >> achieve here. If our goal is avoiding controversy at all costs, >> then your suggestion makes sense. But I would like to suggest that >> our goal should be building a strong community that is open and >> welcoming to all, no matter which part of the world they were born >> in, and live in, and how they identify where in the world they >> live. With that goal in mind, off-loading this decision to ISO >> makes no sense, since that is effectively Mozilla taking a stance on >> what is and is not a country, and taking away the ability of our >> contributors to make this call. >> >> >> Well, it's worth noting that this thread started (going on two weeks ago >> now) when someone complained about someone else using "Prishtina - >> Kosovo - Albania" as their location. >> > > Of course. We need to make it clear that it is the user who has decided > how to fill that form, and what to put there, through the language around > the UI where this information is displayed. And we will obviously keep > receiving complaints from people who don't recognize the states found on > Mozilla Reps or other Mozilla venues, and we need to keep explaining that > to them. > > You may argue that it's futile to keep trying to stop these complaints, > but I'd say that is OK, since the more important thing is for us to be > welcoming to individuals no matter how hey identify their location. > > > I suspect that the person > >> complaining didn't feel like we were fostering a welcoming environment. >> > > Well, I have to say, with the current state of things, I don't believe we > are as welcoming as we could be in this respect too > Could you elaborate a bit on what you are arguing for? A freeform field or a method of extending the canonical list? I'm quite comfortable with having a freeform field that people can put anything they want in (including ISIL or Venus or whatever). I'm much less comfortable with us having a canonical list that is curated according to some idiosyncratic Mozilla standard. While I don't speak for Adam, I suspect this is his view as well. Is this something you disagree with? -Ekr _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
