Indeed, congrats Ioana! and thanks Pierros!
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Pierros Papadeas
wrote:
> Given that there were no objections, I made the change to the module page
> today.
>
> Congratulations to Ioana!
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Pierros Papadeas
> wrote:
> > Hello all,
>
ity for reviews from Council side for
> years and never expressed a lack of time.
>
> I raise this concern now because I've just received and email telling me
> that Council is not longer in charge of certain decisions that I understand
> that were not part of this module de
ountable for will be under this
> module and I feel we don't agree with that.
>
> Cheers.
>
> El 16/02/16 a las 16:41, Majken Connor escribió:
> > I have been working with Tom Farrow (tad) and some other community
> members
> > to put together a proposal for better deli
uld sell themselves. Sometimes this will
be hard, but we are prepared for that.
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:14 AM, David Ascher
wrote:
> Thanks Kenzie. This set of reasons makes sense to me.
>
> My offer to help if/when scope changes stands.
> --David
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, 7:25
owners get control over
budget at all, but at least that there is a clear item on someone's budget
for our things and we're invited to the table to discuss how much is needed
and if it's being well used.
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, 7:44 PM Majken Connor wrote:
>
>>
&
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 4:04 PM, David Ascher
wrote:
> Thanks Kensie --
>
> I wholeheartedly support the general idea of trying to bring some cohesion
> to the systems that still allow decentralized expression by volunteers of
> Mozilla in their local context. We can and should make it easier fo
I'll take a first go at answering these questions, but Pierros or Tom might
have important info to add:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:25 PM, David Ascher
wrote:
> Good to see a proposal.
>
> I think it'd be good to articulate a bit more of the plan and its purpose,
> before diving into the details
I have been working with Tom Farrow (tad) and some other community members
to put together a proposal for better delivering Web Services to
Communities.This would restructure the delivery of services like hosting,
domains and emails which are currently provided to communities. Creating a
module wou
I'm not so sure. This is really a question of what's the purpose of this
module, and of the module system at all!
My first question would be why use this as a mode of recognition for people
who weren't in modules? Do other recognition tools not exist? Are they
lacking? Which method should be impro
It's not uncommon for a new payment processor to do a fraud check before
processing the full payment. Stripe is a well known payment processor, you
can look them up. That $1 should only be a hold or should be credited back.
Here's their support article on the $1 charge:
https://support.stripe.com/
This sounds like you've put some thought into this and are committed to
putting your money where your mouth is. I hope you get a thoughtful
response back!
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Paul Fernhout <
pdfernh...@kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015 at 7:47:58 AM UTC-5, And
This is great to read.
One thing I have noticed is that the public attention span is very short. I
think we do better to figure out how to weather some of the storms than
trying to avoid them. The people who will have a long term impact on the
impression of and future of Thunderbird will almost al
I see your point on the connection of the two. For Mozilla to move away
from the proprietary tools it uses to do its work, there need to be open
source alternatives of high enough quality. Those alternatives need
investment, investment being MOSS' purpose.
When we used TikiWiki for SUMO, it was an
Mozilla decided to move to gApps for their mail after we had this
discussion. That should remove some blockers on the technical side. Also
there is a new participation team that is doing more work on defining and
recognizing contributors, which was a blocker on the process side. It seems
like we're
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Gijs Kruitbosch
wrote:
> On 10/09/2015 00:42, Majken Connor wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:36 PM, R Kent James wrote:
>>
>> On 9/9/2015 9:23 AM, Mike Hoye wrote:
>>>
>>> "Any requirement that systems be
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:36 PM, R Kent James wrote:
> On 9/9/2015 9:23 AM, Mike Hoye wrote:
>
>> "Any requirement that systems be designed or modified to enable
>> third-party access to encrypted data undermines user security. The goal
>> of computer security is to protect users' data from any ac
So I think you've raised issues that mostly people agree with. Your idea of
a platform is interesting, I'm not sure if that is something that had been
considered or attempted.
There are people working on solutions to these problems, some areas are
making progress, some might not be.
Do any of the
It looks like you copy/pasted from somewhere that didn't preserve your
spacing and paragraphs. It seems like you're making some good points, but
in this format it is *really* hard on the eyes. Could you fix up the
formatting and resend?
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 6:18 AM, wrote:
> I've been aroundM
, wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 8:47:41 AM UTC-7, Majken Connor wrote,
> > responding to patriap...@gmail.com:
> > >... but you also say these changes [in Firefox 39] are forced. They're
> > > not, they're just the default.
> > >
> &g
2015 at 1:00 AM, wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 8:47:41 AM UTC-7, Majken Connor wrote,
> responding to patriap...@gmail.com:
> >... but you also say these changes [in Firefox 39] are forced. They're
> > not, they're just the default.
> >
>
> NO!
>
&
We might also wait to see what Gerv comes back with. As I say to my kids,
there's no point arguing about it, look it up. Gerv is currently "looking
it up" or at least trying to. Everything in between is conjecture and will
become irrelevant once we hear from him.
It would be nice, though, to hear
I think a large problem with this conversation is that people speaking for
Mozilla have already clearly made up their minds, which is true otherwise
the feature wouldn't have shipped. However it would be great to get more
info on how this decision was made. It's all sort of piecemeal.
There is a q
We're intertwining a few different topics here. We've been focusing on the
appropriateness of the campaign, but I think the real issue underlying this
argument has been about controlling what children are seeing.
Different parents are sensitive to different things. I was not sensitive to
my kids b
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:40 PM, R Kent James wrote:
> On 6/9/2015 3:23 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
>
> the play on the F*bomb is definitely there
>>
>
> but it did not have to be. This is just a sign of immature marketing by
> Firefox, and frankly its embarrassing.
>
&
I also have children. Many many many children learn the F-bomb at home. As
they learn gosh or darn or check, or hell or learn to take the Lord's name
in vain, at home. Did you not know that gosh means God and darn means damn?
Geez is also short for Jesus. It's pretty much exactly the same, unless
y
You mention education, but you also say these changes are forced. They're
not, they're just the default.
- As you saw there is a setting to allow users to control their updates
- You mention google so I assume you mean the default search engine, it was
only changed to yahoo for users who had never
Terry,
I'm a volunteer so I'll start off by saying this isn't an official
response. You're right, the play on the F*bomb is definitely there. But it
doesn't have to be. It's also a play on Firefox. It's also just as removed
as "G" rated plays on swear works - heck, darn, geez, gosh - you say them
Irvin,
I think it might help move this forward if someone started a proposal doc
somewhere. Otherwise we won't get out of the debate stage. What you just
said seems like a good start for one. It can also capture the questions we
need to answer before deciding on a policy.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 1
Is the answer to 2 "very much" yes? This isn't a feature I'm interested in.
I'm more interested in having a setting to use reader mode by default on
mobile so I don't waste data loading images etc unnecessarily. However I am
guessing that a "save to read later" feature is probably more desirable
ou
This is so unproductive. Everyone seems more concerned with arguing their
opinions than in actually making some sort of progress and as far as I can
tell the people who are most active in this discussion aren't actually
stakeholders who could take next steps in creating a formal proposal for a
poli
We need to agree on requirements before we can measure the value of any
proposed solution.
I don't think that's at all obvious. The technical reason seems to be that
people won't be able to find each other, but that's just not true: people
can converge on the same value in the same way that write-
rkham wrote:
> On 25/05/15 15:24, Majken Connor wrote:
> > Ok, and how would we figure out where people are on a map, or if they are
> > near each other in this case?
>
> The map use case is easy - there can be few arguments about a person
> putting a pin in a map. (Of
Ok, and how would we figure out where people are on a map, or if they are
near each other in this case? I would guess it would be possible to use the
city data (what happens if the city is a contested region though?) or would
we be able to create aliases so places on a map have multiple names?
I a
> If we're trying to provide people the ability to find others who are
> co-located within some margin of error, why not allow people to just stick
> a pin on a map and take lat/long information from there, maybe with a
> radius to create some anonymity and avoid privacy issues for those who are
>
The last set of posts are focusing heavily on how to solve the political
problem and ignoring the use case of the Reps portal. Adam pointed out " If
you want to search for users in a specific country, for example, you have
to deal with issues around misspellings, alternate alphabets, full versus
sh
ago, I could just be
reconstructing a false memory!
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Sheeri Cabral wrote:
> Majken - you may be referring to this, on the Mozillians Yammer:
>
>
> https://www.yammer.com/mozillians/#/threads/show?threadId=518381225&messageId=518381225
>
> On Mon, May
Reps portal uses OpenStreetMap. I believe before we had the user editable
fields you had to select a location on a map (though my memory could be
failing me on this). I have a memory of people complaining about it turning
up as Albania, but I couldn't find anything in my email history to confirm
th
gt;
> Anyways to the point of bugs I think their needs to be some criteria for
> what should and should not be company-confidential. I think we need a new -
> confidential group added as a less restrictive level and with criteria and
> go from there.
>
> On Apr 13, 2015 10:17 AM, &
I'd love to see a formal audit. Like, have some team go through and figure
out where are all these policies, who does what in private and why do they
do it in private? I wonder if anyone in the organization has a complete
view like this?
I'm not opposed to things needing to be private, but it shou
I do like that this group has been focusing on being welcoming and
encouraging to contributors with disabilities, without focusing on
contributing to a11y and think that this is a unique set of expertise
provided by this group that we haven't had before.
satdav - I think you need to present a more
Thank you for appreciating my efforts. Hopefully since that is the case,
you will take my reply to heart.
I am not sure what specific incidents have happened that have made you call
out these particular people here, but in several of your accusations you
are misinformed.
Pierros is still owner of
I am also for open by default, but I think that we also need to take human
behaviour into account, not just the technical possibilities. I think given
how Mozilla operates, publicly (not just for Mozillians) available logs
would be akin to streaming every conference room over vidyo by default.
This
I skimmed, so forgiveness please in advance if I am repeating points
already made...
This isn't to say that I am opposed to having public logs of *project*
channels, but I see two problems that I think should be addressed:
1. Trying to keep up with a project by reading IRC logs (or watching
meeti
Sorry, for community members, not communities!
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
> No, the idea is to figure out email addresses for communities and use Reps
> as the pilot group to figure out how to do this since Reps have already
> been vetted.
>
> On Wed,
No, the idea is to figure out email addresses for communities and use Reps
as the pilot group to figure out how to do this since Reps have already
been vetted.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:21 PM, fantasai
wrote:
> On 01/14/2015 11:03 AM, Mike Connor wrote:
>
>> I'll note that, historically, we have
n,
>
> On 08/01/15 19:15, Majken Connor wrote:
> > I know there is a bugzilla component that covers the mailing list/groups
> > discussion forums. I was just quickly wondering if there is a module that
> > governs them.
>
> I believe this is one of the many area
Coworker doesn't have to refer to employees and given the context of the
conversation, I believe it wasn't meant to. Whether people are paid or
volunteering, a workspace is still a workspace.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Mike Hoye wrote:
> On 2015-01-08 2:40 PM, Al Billings wrote:
>
>> Potent
I know there is a bugzilla component that covers the mailing list/groups
discussion forums. I was just quickly wondering if there is a module that
governs them.
Thanks!
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/li
7 9:35 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
>
>> On 01/01/15 17:03, Majken Connor wrote:
>>
>>> Whichever
>>> version of God does or doesn't exist doesn't affect Mozilla as an
>>> organization.
>>>
>>
>> Unfortunately, that's not so
without being exclusive shouldn't be prevented from doing so
just because you can't.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:20 AM, wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 31, 2014 8:57:56 AM UTC+1, Gervase Markham wrote:
> > Hi Majken,
> >
> > On 29/12/14 18:00, Majken Connor wrote:
&g
ogress, however sometimes
they do, so I think the right thing to do is to leave room for discretion.
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
> I don't know whether the disclaimer is what Mike is talking about, though
> I think it does obviously let people know right up
I don't know whether the disclaimer is what Mike is talking about, though I
think it does obviously let people know right up front that you'll be
talking about Christianity, though I don't think it really does a good job
of describing what you'll say. However, this post would be in violation of
the
It's hard to tell from your wording if you're planning to give people
advance notice before disabling their feeds. If you weren't already
planning on it, I'd suggest that you do. Technically it's not very
different, but psychologically, being consulted before an action is taken
feels much better th
I think we were in agreement on Reps getting email addresses. Two parts
stalled:
1. How to actually give out the mailboxes
2. When we expand to allow non-Reps contributors to have the addresses (as
we agreed that contributors besides Reps have earned them) how do we have a
clear definition for non
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Mike Hoye wrote:
> On 2014-12-13 1:36 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
>
>> When planet was created there were few enough blogs aggregated that it
>> was a good way to get to better know people outside of a Mozilla context.
>> Last time we had a d
I think we may need to have an old guard/new guard discussion on this. The
nature of planet has shifted in a similar way to the way an organization
shifts. When planet was created there were few enough blogs aggregated that
it was a good way to get to better know people outside of a Mozilla
context
ble for viewing something you didn't want to view.
Especially was the wrong word there! I think most people don't want to view
it "Especially" because it's gross and wrong, NOT just because it's illegal.
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
> I
I am totally not informed on this, so please keep that in mind.
We already include a similar form of censorship in the browser with our
security settings around malicious sites. I can imagine that a feature that
works the same way would be the way to go if this were in fact in the
works.
a) Most
Adam,
Thanks for providing the extra information. I don't have much more to say
as I'm not well informed on the relationships these companies have with
their governments or their business practices. I am not so naive, just
speaking broadly. I do think though that this problem isn't limited to
Chin
These search deals aren't with the governments of these countries. Just
like in the US, people in different regions prefer different services.
Those happen to be the preferred services in those countries. The previous
Google deal was more hypocritical because we stopped tailoring the default
to the
Hi all,
It seems like people haven't been sure who to contact when they want to
reach out to Community IT either for discussions or for an issue. We've
updated our wiki page here - https://wiki.mozilla.org/IT/Community
I am the project manager and the main point of contact if you want to reach
ou
ill a
>>> minor, hence I'm almost certain he wasn't an employee at any certain
>>> period
>>> of time
>>> 5. If he can blog on /community, then the presumption of volunteers can't
>>> blog seems mostly wrong
>>> 6. With that said,
Thanks everyone. I'm glad to see that I was misinformed. I knew that
volunteers had been able to blog in the past, but I thought the policy had
changed since I trusted my source.
I apologize to anyone who was upset. I didn't think I was making an
assumption.
Do we have a wiki page or some other g
I have seen this issue raised in a few places. I did a quick search and
don't think it's been raised here before, but please link me to past
conversations if it has.
Volunteers are supposed to be the backbone of Mozilla, but there are so
many "little" things that they can't do that widen the gap b
Oops, I meant to leave this on Governance as well.
-- Forwarded message --
From: William Reynolds
Date: Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: [mozillians] Words from a Mozillian
To: Majken Connor , Robert Kaiser
Cc: Mozillians
Here is the recap of ReMo Camp
https
Gerv,
Your train of thought seems dangerously similar to "if you've got nothing
to hide then you've got nothing to be worried about" which is definitely
NOT Mozilla's policy on privacy and so I think is irrelevant here.
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 27/08/14 18:4
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 27/08/14 15:07, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> > That *really* depends on the URL. For example it seems pretty
> > reasonable to not want mozilla to know I've clicked on a tile going to
> >
> http://www.amazon.com/Titan-17612-12-Piece-Precis
"to explore new ways of doing things"
I think "be disruptive" has the same issue in that this is not the usually
meaning when we use it this way.
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Brian King wrote:
> On 27. 07. 14 19:18, Robert Kaiser wrote:
>
>> ddi...@mozilla.com schrieb:
>>
>>> You agree to c
No, but emphasizing it earlier on in the process will signal that we take
it seriously. Which is why I think having a formal doc is important as
well. That sends the signal that we find it important enough to highlight
it on its own, not just reference it across different processes. If we put
it ou
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 5:16 PM, wrote:
> > Is it perhaps because the information were now trying to be explicit
> > about lacked peer review and consensus? Who approved any of these
> > expectations? Where was that discussion held?
>
> We need to be explicit because the information we want new c
I love it, it's short, to the point and presenting it to new paid
contributors as suggested will reinforce that working within the community,
not just your team, is our priority. It's a tiny change, but I think it
would have a great impact on the tone and context of how new people think
about worki
I almost wonder if the intent her is so that volunteers don't try to police
each other... ie you hold yourself to this agreement but don't tell others
that they are or aren't violating the agreement.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Robert DC. Reyes
wrote:
> I beg to disagree. It is straightfor
>From the feedback it seems safe to assume the local community in Brazil and
other countries where the World Cup is A Big Deal (tm) weren't consulted on
messaging. If that's true then that's something we really need to fix. The
Reps program is under engagement, the engagement team should probably h
I think this is better.
Pascal - I have a feeling this is meant to be as part of your contributions
to Mozilla. So you can't rob a bank and donate the money to Mozilla, or
host an event that would be considered trespassing. The wording can be
clearer, but maybe it is the formatting in email, the l
I just want to mention again (did it go through the first time?) that many
teams besides Reps need a formal agreement to allow volunteers to take on
responsibilities and leadership and to allow them to be in on sensitive
information. This agreement as it is written seems like it would be
intended
I'm wondering if we're misunderstanding the purpose of this agreement, or
maybe people are approaching it from different angles?
It seems worded to me to address the need to have a formal agreement when
we want to give certain responsibilities to volunteer contributors. We're
missing something gen
Hi everyone,
At the summit last year, several of us had "aha" moments around Mozilla,
the community, the internet, and language. We've started a small but
growing working group towards addressing the issues of open language tools.
More info about the project and our scope here -
https://wiki.mozi
No, I don't think so, but I would imagine an edited highlight reel from the
meeting would get a lot more views than simply a video of the whole
meeting. When I miss meetings I never have an extra hour lying around to
watch a video just in case something happened that I want to see.
On Thu, May 22
A bit aside to the discussion of DRM itself -
This is the kind of topic that Reps will be asked about. I'll be helping
man our booth at OSCON for example. Of course Reps were invited to the town
hall, but I'd like to see something a bit more like training than just
information. A guide similar to
Stacy,
While people are talking about switching from Google, the underlying
question really is how do we know we can trust Google? Yes, we have a
signed agreement with them, but would we be able to tell if they are
violating the agreement? If people are confident that we can hold Google
accountabl
I think the "master" question is: How would we know if Google is misusing
the data?
All of the others follow out of that. If we can't know whether or not
Google is misusing the data then it's a matter of faith, and that's not the
best position to be in.
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Michael K
Yes, we have to be careful to distinguish between what Mozilla as an
organization is equipped to do and what Mozilla as a community is capable
of doing. It is acceptable to say that MoCo can't make this a priority with
dedicated resources at the moment, but that doesn't mean that if a group of
cont
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:10 PM, wrote:
> Thanks for responding.
>
> 1) Why didn't they offer him the CEO position? Has Mozilla attempted to
> persuade Brendan to speak publicly on this? What was his response?
>
Because he had just quit that position. "I don't want to be CEO anymore."
"Ok, how a
ubén Martín
wrote:
> El 16/04/14 00:05, Majken Connor escribió:
> > It does occur to me that Discourse would be a very good tool for this,
> > though I'd recommend a stand-alone instance from one we might use for
> > team/community communications. An area of SUMO might
First, of any new members of the list are reading this, this is not at all
meant as a suggestion that you're not welcome here.
The governance list is the best place we have for discussing the current
issues, but it's really not a good place to engage the public on individual
issues. SUMO isn't the
If you want to use that logic then you'll not be able to use Chrome either
as it has many similarities to Firefox.
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
"5 Mozilla employees demanded that Eich be excluded because of his
religious beliefs, which violates the core value of inclusiveness."
This was a blindspot in our policy. They weren't asking Brendan to be
excluded from Mozilla, they were saying they didn't support him as a
leader. There are alread
Jim,
Mitchell and Brendan are cofounders of Mozilla and have been friends for a
long time. Knowing that probably makes a difference in how her words are
interpreted. We have realized that the initial blog post she made had some
issues with wording. The FAQ has been updated for some of those issues
wrong will
help us.
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Steve W wrote:
> On Saturday, April 12, 2014 1:23:08 PM UTC-7, Majken Connor wrote:
> > Kenneth,
> >
> >
> >
> > What specifically would you like an apology for? We have had a lot of
> >
> > people
Kenneth,
What specifically would you like an apology for? We have had a lot of
people coming through with varying points of view of what happened and what
they think should have happened instead.
Unfortunately it seems many people are upset that Brendan resigned and left
Mozilla. However this was
We didn't force him out. We didn't force him out because of his views. We
knew about his donation 2 years ago.
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Big Fred wrote:
> That's just an article that agrees with Eich being purged.
>
> 10.04.2014, 22:08, "Majken Connor" :
I think we haven't really been talking a lot about the tactics other than
the tweets and other online campaigns.
I have heard under circumstances that can only be considered hearsay that
things like death threats were issued towards Brendan, but I haven't seen
much talk about it. Certainly it woul
Mozilla community.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> On Thu, 4/10/14, Majken Connor wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: another one
> To: "David Rajchenbach-Teller"
> Cc: "Shaun Kennard" , "
> governance@lists.mozil
Shaun,
Here is a really good article about free speech and what happened with
Brendan - http://whatever.scalzi.com/2014/04/05/brandon-eich-and-mozilla/
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 5:29 AM, David Rajchenbach-Teller <
dtel...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Shaun,
>
> I'm sad to hear that. While you are not th
This article does a really good job of answering your question in the
context of what happened here -
http://whatever.scalzi.com/2014/04/05/brandon-eich-and-mozilla/
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Jim Polizzi wrote:
> I've just deleted Firefox from my computer--- good riddance
> __
Glenn,
We knew about the prop 8 donation a few years ago, so it's not so simple.
If the donation was a big enough problem for us he'd have never been
chosen. Obviously it was a problem for some people, but the media storm hit
so hard and so fast that Brendan resigned before we could think this
thr
Dennis,
It got lost in all the replies to different posts, but thank you so much
for this message in particular. These issues are exactly what we've been
working through, and partly why we weren't able to handle the situation
better. Most of us hadn't had time to decide if we thought Brendan was t
Hey,
I know someone who was asking about how someone would put forward their
name to join the Mozilla board. He has experience on other boards,
including not for profits and has been a long-time Mozillian.
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.moz
I like all of Ben's suggestions except having a vote. Not being democratic
has worked well for Mozilla. Having clear owners and expertise has worked.
Switching to votes doesn't actually ensure people's voices are heard, and I
think it actually does a worse job of making sure people's voices are hea
Gio,
The problem is that the role of CEO is outward facing. I was lucky to have
one of my questions answered in the townhall, basically how is the role of
CEO different from Brendan's previous roles of being CTO and on the
steering committee. The big answers were working with partners, and hiring.
1 - 100 of 178 matches
Mail list logo
