> 1. You’re concerned that this change is a sop to the politically > militant, and that this is a slippery slope.
I believe the proposed change of language is intended to bring it in line with a very specific political ideology/worldview. > 2. The proposal itself is cosmetic and does little or nothing to advance > diversity which you believe is not a problem in open source, at least > not relative to proprietary software development. My point was that open source by itself lends itself to diversity by it's very nature. We can always do more. Translations are a good place to start for most projects. I support all kinds of diversity in open source and would like to see more diversity in open source. I do not believe changing words to align with very specific political ideologies, whatever ideology that is, contributes to substantive diversity. > 3. Focusing energy here is a distraction (or worse) to Mozilla as an > open source project. Focusing energy on changing language to appease activists who have it out for certain words is a distraction, not just from development of code but from actual diversity efforts. Until there is real data to show increased diversity in projects that reject meritocracy as a formal value/policy I don't think a change should be made. _______________________________________________ governance mailing list governance@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
