> This creates another potential benefit to > these bug reports that will occur if we *fail*.
Hmm never looked at it from this angle. Yes it may be a smart move and effective. Also heyjoe said that RMS will look at the bug report, so FSF is kind of in the process already.
OTOH, there's a subtle difference in our approaches to this strategy: I gather that you want to find out whether there is deliberacy in this bundle, and if there is, you want to make it stick out like a sore thumb. Meanwhile I am sure that there is deliberacy (how can such a decision be not deliberate?) and support this strategy only for the second ("sore thumb") part.
My only concern with this strategy is that, Mozilla may get prudent (but not get "right" at the high level) and cover this up by complying with all your 3 requests, which masks their higher level main approach. OTOH, now that they are caught pants down, it might be better not to give them the chance to cover this blunder up. Because this wouldn't cure the disease but just postpone it only to recur later - and the next recurrence may be graver, and may not be caught by the community (actually this one is not caught by the community either, if it wasn't for heyjoe's efforts this privacy issue would probably pass unnoticed - a big thanks to heyjoe for this).
So I do support your strategy but I'm not quite sure. I'm kind of close to the fence.
