On 4/3/2014 4:44 PM, Kyle Huey wrote:
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Ben Bucksch wrote:
I've wanted to post this proposal since a long time, but given that Mozilla
now needs to decide about both a CTO and CEO, I think this is a good time:
I've always seen Mozilla as a project, not a company.
On 4/13/2014 12:38 PM, Michael Connor wrote:
I’d have been surprised if no one on the board raised the possibility at that
point. In a crisis, it’s important to put all of the options on the table and
understand the tradeoffs. As unpalatable as the idea would have seemed to many
at the time,
On 4/13/2014 6:52 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 2:22 PM, John Boley wrote:
If you need to be a homosexual to use Moxilla products, I
do not - and certainly do not wishto- qualify.
You do not need to be a homosexual to use Mozilla products.
In fact, I have several fri
On 4/13/2014 9:23 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
You, sir, are relying on your preconceived biases to read things into
what Nick wrote that are simply not there.
On the contrary Boris, I'm a realist, and tend to think that folks mean
what they say.
I can't know other than what they say.
--
*JoeS*
__
On 4/13/2014 9:26 PM, Kyle Huey wrote:
I believe Nicholas's reply is intended to be read with his tongue
firmly planted in his cheek.
A smiley would have helped there.
Yeah, I can understand that, but given the climate...
--
*JoeS*
___
governance mail
On 4/15/2014 6:05 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
1. Is easy for the public to use
Governance seemed very easy to use for a lot of folks.
I understand that it expanded it's original purpose.
But Mozilla is open right.
2. Allows existing communication channels to maintain their current
function (having
