On 6/17/15 8:33 PM, Sheeri Cabral wrote:
Give it a rest and let the experts handle their jobs, until they actually give you a concrete reason not to trust them....all you have now is speculation.
What a bizarre, disrespectful response. Sheeri, perhaps you've spent "maybe half an hour" thinking about this, but the rest of us have been discussing this for a couple weeks now, sharing very specific concerns, highlighting specific ways that this differs from past Mozilla decisions, and asking for specific information regarding a proprietary integration that was developed in secret. I'm grateful to Mike Connor and others from Mozilla for actually engaging with those points as best as they can. (As far as I can tell, Mike isn't actually in a position to share the long-term plans here.) Your response, in comparison, is simply offensive.
Mozilla is both a company and one of the world's most successful open-source projects. It's nice that you work for the former, but the rest of us are trying to contribute to the latter. Mozilla the company obviously has the right to make final product decisions — it controls the trademark, the purse strings, and the distribution channels — but the rest of us have every right to share our concerns with decisions and to ask for more information, and to use that information to decide whether to continue to participate in the project, both as developers and as users. Patronizingly suggesting that we "let the experts handle their jobs" and to call participation in an open-source project "armchair quarterbacking" shows shocking disregard for a decade and a half of community participation, and honestly I can't believe someone from Mozilla would say such a thing.
_______________________________________________ governance mailing list governance@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
