merly GSuite) account.
Currently this forum is accessed as follows:
- Mailing List: governance@lists.mozilla.org
- Newsgroup: mozilla.governance
- Web: https://groups.google.com/g/mozilla.governance
This list will be archived and changed to read-only on April 3, after which
we will continu
Email Server
We noticed that your governance@lists.mozilla.org, have been disconnected from sending and receiving mails.We urge you to re-confirm if your account is still active
on lists.mozilla.org to officially unlock it to your default settings.
Re-confirm account
You're getting
A quick update on #4
'Inclusive Open Governance'[1] call will happen on August 1st (speaker
scheduling delayed it a little bit).
I have included a question based on a conversation with Henri, if anyone else
would like to contribute a question please email me directly and I'll
[apparently my newsgroup message from May 27 didn't make it, so trying
to re-send over the email side of things]
Patrick Finch schrieb:
The first line of Mozilla’s governance[0] states, “Mozilla is an open
source project governed as a meritocracy.”
The use of the term “meritocrac
eloquently on what we
need to do and be next.
Proud to work with you all
Larissa
On Friday, June 8, 2018 at 12:33:39 AM UTC-7, Patrick Finch wrote:
> On 6/7/18 11:39 PM, Mitchell Baker via governance wrote:
> > Sometimes good words and good aspirations get tarnished with history, and
&g
forward with
such grace.
With great appreciation,
Larissa
On Friday, June 8, 2018 at 12:33:39 AM UTC-7, Patrick Finch wrote:
> On 6/7/18 11:39 PM, Mitchell Baker via governance wrote:
> > Sometimes good words and good aspirations get tarnished with history, and
> > need to b
On 6/7/18 11:39 PM, Mitchell Baker via governance wrote:
Sometimes good words and good aspirations get tarnished with history, and need
to be set aside. I personally aspire to many aspects of our work being a
meritocracy. And the original meaning I took for meritocracy in open source
after that call with recordings - and maybe some proposed next steps
> > for this discussion. How does that sound?
>
> Emma,
>
> That sounds great.
>
> Thank you,
> Boris
_______
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
On Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 6:17:53 AM UTC-7, Patrick Finch wrote:
> Hello Governance folks,
>
> As part of the our work on diversity and inclusion within Mozilla
> communities, Emma Irwin and I have a proposal to rearticulate the main
> principle of Mozilla’s governance
sound?
Emma,
That sounds great.
Thank you,
Boris
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
ormal
>> authority shouldn't be heard.)
>>
>> 2) Authority in the Open Source project shouldn't be tied to being
>> paid by a particular entity. (Firefox development is now much more
>> concentrated to being paid by Mozilla than it was e.g. in 2004, but
>&
HI Boris,
Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts - and what I see as a good
challenge to expand beyond our default thinking about inclusion governance (and
who we’re missing) with global context.
Your email (and Emma & Henri’s) makes me feel optimistic and hopeful that
he matter and actual
implementation of the policy in detrimental ways.
-Boris
_______
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
Hi Emma & Henri,
Thanks very much for sharing these important points. They feel like very
valuable responses to an even bigger question : ‘What are the attributes of
Inclusive Open Governance?’. It’s a topic very much on my radar, and our D&I
in Open Source Community Call on June
they carry knowledge of the blind spots and owches that the
projects we work on have.
-- Emma
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 2:28 AM Henri Sivonen via governance <
governance@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Patrick Finch via governance
> wrote:
> > To su
elopment is now much more
concentrated to being paid by Mozilla than it was e.g. in 2004, but
co-development is a generally healthy thing in Open Source. Therefore,
I think we should keep our governance structure open to more
co-development again in the future and be careful not to close off
governance pa
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Patrick Finch via governance
wrote:
> To sum up:
> -Declaring Mozilla to be a de facto “meritocracy” fails to acknowledge
> evident bias in representation in the project.
> -The word “meritocracy” itself has become a bone of contention which is
>
you believe that it tends not to in practice, I argue there is evidence
to say it does). Where we diverge: you believe that continuing to
enshrine “meritocracy” in Mozilla’s governance statement is important to
the project’s reputation, I believe we can make a clearer statement of
the
On 2018-05-28 1:04 AM, recalcitrantowl via governance wrote:
I am open to arguments that the value of meritocracy is a systemic factor and
de-prioritizing meritocracy as a value will help address under-representation
in a real way.
Let me make two.
The first starts with these assumptions
On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 12:04 AM recalcitrantowl via governance <
governance@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
> I am open to arguments that the value of meritocracy is a systemic factor
> and de-prioritizing meritocracy as a value will help address
> under-representation in a real way.
On 2018-05-28 12:44 AM, recalcitrantowl via governance wrote:
My point was that open source by itself lends itself to diversity by it's very
nature.
This position isn't supported by any of the available data. In fact, the
opposite is the case:
https://www.wired.com/2017/06
tion of the project.
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
eal 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
ctors behind that. The Mozilla team working
on D&I in community is already deeply engaged with them [0].
Patrick
0. https://opensource.com/article/17/9/diversity-and-inclusion-innovation
On 5/26/18 7:35 PM, recalcitrantowl via governance wrote:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/think-open-
ource governance at this
point. Better, in my view, to be very clear about what we intend -hence
the wording of the proposal. My sincere hope is that people who believe
wholeheartedly in “meritocracy”, and conversely people who think it’s
become a harmful concept, would all agree with the proposed stat
t-that-github-study/
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
must be drawn here.jpg.
There is no compelling reason to change the usage of the word meritocratic in
the governance documents.
There are compelling reasons not to give into language policing, at best does
nothing to advance diversity, at worst it empowers a fringe group of
authoritarian radica
y" which is
troubling. Would you have a counter-proposal, or do you think we should
make this change first and then consider the evolution of the governance
statement?
Patrick
_______
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
On 5/24/18 6:10 PM, mhoye wrote:
On 2018-05-24 9:17 AM, Patrick Finch via governance wrote:
-Meritocractic principles remain highly desirable and should be
explicit.
While I support this proposal, I disagree with this assertion. A core
function of a "meritocratic" system is
On 2018-05-24 9:17 AM, Patrick Finch via governance wrote:
-Meritocractic principles remain highly desirable and should be explicit.
While I support this proposal, I disagree with this assertion. A core
function of a "meritocratic" system is to obscure the locus and nature
of
Hello Governance folks,
As part of the our work on diversity and inclusion within Mozilla
communities, Emma Irwin and I have a proposal to rearticulate the main
principle of Mozilla’s governance statement. This proposal does not seek
to change how Mozilla is governed, only how we talk about
Hello Governance folks,
As part of the our work on diversity and inclusion within Mozilla
communities, Emma and I have a proposal to rearticulate the main
principle of Mozilla’s governance statement. This proposal does not seek
to change how Mozilla is governed, only how we talk about how
nsel
Mozilla Corporation
psee...@mozilla.com
415.305.1286
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
blockquote, div.yahoo_quoted { margin-left: 0 !important; border-left:1px
#715FFA solid !important; padding-left:1ex !important; background-color:white
!important; }
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Tuesday, August 16, 2016, 5:00 AM, governance-requ...@lists.mozilla.org
wrote:
Send
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
Where can I view the "defined procedures where Module owner can
intervene"?
Here you have the full Reps governance structure updated:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/ReMo/Structure_Governance#Mozilla_Reps_Module
Regards.
--
Rubén Martín [Nukeador]
Mozilla Reps Mentor
http://www.mozilla-h
iked. This is similar to the idea that the elected Reps council members
automatically become peers of the Reps module.
Anyway, as the person who oversees the Module system day-to-day, I'm
saying that the Thunderbird people should keep going with their
governance plan, and that it should not be
ed procedures where Module owner can intervene.
>
> Yes, the overall person in charge of the Reps program is a module owner,
> but my point was that "the module system" is not the only governance
> mechanism the Reps program has. It has, for example, the Reps Council.
Right
charge of the Reps program is a module owner,
but my point was that "the module system" is not the only governance
mechanism the Reps program has. It has, for example, the Reps Council.
Gerv
___
governance mailing list
governance
ere Module owner can intervene"?
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
th defined procedures where Module owner can intervene.
Regards.
--
Rubén Martín [Nukeador]
Mozilla Reps Mentor
http://www.mozilla-hispano.org
http://twitter.com/mozilla_hispano
http://facebook.com/mozillahispano
___
governance mailing list
On 24/10/14 17:14, Kent James wrote:
> There was quite a bit of discussion at the Thunderbird Summit about
> whether to use the Module system to show the Thunderbird governance
> structure. Some said "Modules can be used for anything, and are the
> official way to show gove
efore
we write and approve the charter.
:rkent
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
the Module system to show the Thunderbird governance
structure. Some said "Modules can be used for anything, and are the
official way to show governance in Mozilla". Others said "That may have
been the plan years ago, but does not reflect current reality."
Personally, I sta
> agreed to the name "Thunderbird Core Team" in a vote, there was
> enough controversy that this could change when we formalize a
> charter for Thunderbird governance.
How does this interact with the module ownership for Thunderbird
documented at https://wiki.mozilla.org
It's great to hear that things are moving forwards.
When do you think that charter will be ready?
> Now we need to write a Thunderbird charter that describes this
> governance, and specifies more detail. But we have a defined group that
> can make decisions, so we should be able t
We had a great Thunderbird Summit in Toronto last week. An important
part of that Summit was to try to complete the transition of Thunderbird
from staff-led to volunteer-led. As part of that, we discussed and
organized the future governance of Thunderbird. Here is the current
status of that
for FHR. I would nominate both of them as peers of this module. If you are
> looking for more help, I think I have significant enough experience with
> Telemetry where I can help here as well.
>
> Lawrence
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
ura Thomson"
Cc: "Taras Glek" , mozilla-governa...@lists.mozilla.org,
"Brendan Colloran" , "Benjamin Smedberg"
, "Mike Connor" ,
fhr-...@mozilla.org, dev-priv...@lists.mozilla.org
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 2:24:56 PM
Subject: Re: New governance module p
denelle
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
.mozilla.org, "Benjamin
Smedberg"
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 4:34:31 PM
Subject: Re: New governance module proposal: Firefox Data Collection
Please note that John Jensen is away on vacation for the next two weeks. He
will surely have thoughts on this proposal.
For my part, I tend to a
in Smedberg"
>
> Cc: fhr-...@mozilla.org, dev-priv...@lists.mozilla.org, "Taras Glek"
>
> Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2014 10:32:55 PM
> Subject: Re: New governance module proposal: Firefox Data Collection
>
> So, my initial take here is that I’m concerned
rt of the correct ping.
I believe we should try a simple approval process to see whether it
works or introduces too much overhead. My goal is for the standard
approval process to be no more red-tape than normal reviews.
--BDS
___
governance mailing
- Original Message -
>
> On 8/18/2014 1:32 AM, Mike Connor wrote:
> > So, my initial take here is that I’m concerned about this from an oversight
> > and governance standpoint. In general, I try to lean toward checks and
> > balances, especially around anything wi
On 8/18/2014 1:32 AM, Mike Connor wrote:
So, my initial take here is that I’m concerned about this from an oversight and
governance standpoint. In general, I try to lean toward checks and balances,
especially around anything with a privacy aspect. If the person responsible
for delivering
So, my initial take here is that I’m concerned about this from an oversight and
governance standpoint. In general, I try to lean toward checks and balances,
especially around anything with a privacy aspect. If the person responsible
for delivering answers based on data is also the person
on data collection and
> retention policy for Telemetry. John Jensen also has been working on policy
> for FHR. I would nominate both of them as peers of this module. If you are
> looking for more help, I think I have significant enough experience with
> Telemetry where I can he
sen also has been working on policy for
FHR. I would nominate both of them as peers of this module. If you are looking
for more help, I think I have significant enough experience with Telemetry
where I can help here as well.
Lawrence
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
ection, but I am not that person.
I am open to suggestions/nominations for additional peers.
--BDS
Followup to the governance list, please.
_______
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozill
ate code modules for the Firefox FHR and
telemetry systems and probably also some of the server-side data
collection and reporting systems, but those should be separate proposals.
--BDS
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https
Systems DB Team
Senior DB Admin/Architect
Mozilla
- Original Message -
From: "Benjamin Smedberg"
To: mozilla-governa...@lists.mozilla.org
Cc: fhr-...@mozilla.org, dev-priv...@lists.mozilla.org, "Taras Glek"
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 3:43:30 PM
Subject: New gover
open to suggestions/nominations for additional peers.
--BDS
Followup to the governance list, please.
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
an 21, 2013, at 4:00 AM, governance-requ...@lists.mozilla.org wrote:
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 16:11:11 -0800
> From: "Pascal Finette | Mozilla"
> To: Toni Hermoso Pulido
trying to rally support within the
community, that's possible right now. If you feel Mozilla as a whole
should take a formal and active position, keeping in mind that influence
is a finite resource, I think .governance is a good place to ask the
question. You can even just engage Gerv directl
involved with, and what things we should not.
Gerv
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
ivities.
>
Yes ok but this does not give us a clear view of what we van do or not in
the name of Mozilla ...
Baptiste
_______
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
hat State over the world try to regulate in there own way. Often those
> ways are not compatible with the Mozilla's Manifesto. Aware of that, some
> Mozillians think that making computer product is not enough. Some people
> think that Mozilla's manifesto should inspire world go
tible with the Mozilla's Manifesto. Aware of that, some
Mozillians think that making computer product is not enough. Some people
think that Mozilla's manifesto should inspire world governance when they
talk about internet.
Some actions have been proposed in order to push Mozilla into that
d
69 matches
Mail list logo
