On 2015-05-22 10:16 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:


On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <[email protected]
<mailto:[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]>
        <mailto:[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?

A freeform field is unfortunately not suitable because of the reasons mentioned before (such as making it harder to perform searches because misspellings, etc.), so at the lack of that, I think we should be open to expending the canonical list using user-assigned code where ISO-3166-1 fails to list a country in situations similar to the one for Kosovo.
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Reply via email to