On Mar 8, 8:37 pm, Mike Connor <mcon...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> My own view:I've actually been thinking about planet lately, and I'm sorry to see
> Mozilla is more than a company, and more than a software project. It is a rich and diverse community with a shared mission, focused on choice and freedom on the Internet. We have many challenges and many competitors, and it has only been through trusting each other and working incredibly hard that we've reached the point where we are today. Without both that trust and that passion, Mozilla cannot continue to scale, and cannot continue making a difference. I believe that as a community, we must focus on that which unites us, and leave aside all that could and will divide us.
> While it has always been a venue for controversy, the events of this week have clearly highlighted Planet as a potential source of damage and division within the community. I believe that the amount of anger and hurt I have read and heard this week is far beyond anything I have seen in nearly nine years working on the project. I personally feel that we must learn from this and ensure that this type of incident cannot be repeated.
> It brings me no joy or happiness to say this, but at this point I believe that the current Planet Mozilla cannot continue to exist, at least as a Mozilla-supported or Mozilla-branded site. Mozilla is not about religion, or politics, or morality, and as currently constituted we are providing a platform (in the form of orders of magnitude more readers) for any or all of these issues, in a way that is inevitably associated with both our brand and our community. I simply do not believe this is in the best interests of the project, or of the community, to continue to provide this platform, with a module policy defending the use of this platform to advance goals separate from those of Mozilla.
> I don’t expect anyone to be happy about this, on either side. No situation like this will ever be happy. But I believe that we, as a community, must collectively decide to move on from this and find a new way forward.
> -- Mike
> On 2012-03-08, at 7:30 PM, Mitchell Baker wrote:
> > This week has seen heated discussion about the scope of materials syndicated to Planet Mozilla. Here's my view.
> > Mozilla is a community unified around the Mozilla mission and manifesto. We agree on these things, but we are extremely diverse on almost every other topic. In fact, Mozilla is remarkable in how many people with otherwise differing views we gather around our mission.
> > How do we handle this?
> > First, we should be very clear that being a "Mozillian" is about supporting the Mozilla mission. If we start to try to make "Mozilla" mean "those people who share not only the Mozilla mission but also my general political / social / religious / environmental view" we will fail. If we focus Mozilla on our shared consensus regarding the Mozilla mission and manifesto then the opportunities before us are enormous.
> > Mozilla's diversity is a success condition. Our mission and our goal is truly global. Our mission taps into a shared desire for respect and control and user sovereignty that runs across cultures and across many other worldviews. We may even offend each other in some of our other views. Despite this, we share a commitment to the Mozilla mission. This is a remarkable achievement and important to our continued success.
> > What does this mean for how we handle planet.mozilla.org?
> > We could say that Planet Mozilla focuses on our mission and related work. This view means getting to know the full personality of Mozillians will take more work and happen in other areas for those who want to do so.
> > We could say that Planet Mozilla reflects the general worldview of Mozillians, including areas outside of the Mozilla consensus. This view expresses a larger slice of each Mozillian's life, but means we'll spend more time reacting to areas where we disagree or even offend each other.
> > I believe the former is the best path. It's a path based on the promise of the web, of inclusion, and of user sovereignty. It's the path of the Mozilla Manifesto, and its adoption by people of all sorts of different views. It allows us to focus on issues, such as SOPA and ACTA, that are directly related to our mission. It allows Mozillians to have divergent views on other topics without tearing ourselves apart and damaging our ability to fulfill our unique mission.
> > In the past we've chosen the latter for planet.mozilla.org. I believe we need a core information flow and gathering space that is focused on what we all came to Mozilla for -- how to move our particular mission forward.
> > Proposals have been made to change planet, or to start a similar planet.mozillians.org. I'm personally learning towards the idea of remaking planet to be the gathering place for updates about Mozilla activities. I'll talk with the planet module owners and peers, as well as monitor the discussion forums. I'm not sure of the particular solution yet, but in my mind I'm clear that we need a forum focused on the thing we all agree on -- Mozilla and our mission.
it came up in this manner. However, I think if we address planet's
shortcomings as they already existed, we also solve the specific
problem we've hit here. Back when it was last decided that planet
should contain a person's personal posts, Mozilla and planet were much
smaller than they are now. Also twitter has taken over much of the
"getting to know you" work that planet used to do. I don't think we're
losing out at this point in time the way we would have in the past, by
making planet project only.
Many teams are having their own planets now, interns had one, mozilla
I was already going to propose this simply to make it easier to
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.