About search engines policies

[Nukeador]

Hi,

Since the change to Russian version from Yandex to Google and the
controversy that seems to be happening on the bug comments, I would like to
open discussion here to clarify all concerns:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761592

The questions I see here are:

1. The change is due a global agreement with Google.
2. The community wasn't consulted due these agreements are closed.

I would add:

1. Don't we have the possibility to make pressure in these deals? It
seems it's like google would drop the global agreement because of this and
we can do anything even Yandex seems to be a better search engine for
Russians.
2. Several people in the community have signed confidentially clauses
(Mozilla Reps), I don't see the point of not including Reps from Russia in
the discussion even if it has to be done non-publicly.

Regards.
--
Rubén Martín (Nukeador)
Mozilla Reps Council member
http://mozilla-hispano.org
http://twitter.com/mozilla_hispano
http://facebook.com/mozillahispano

[Gervase Markham]

On 11/06/12 14:00, Nukeador wrote:
> Since the change to Russian version from Yandex to Google and the
> controversy that seems to be happening on the bug comments, I would like to
> open discussion here to clarify all concerns:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761592

We should probably start with Harvey's statement on the issue from the bug:

<quote>
There have been a few questions in this thread that seem to fall into
two main groups: i) what’s the rationale; and ii) why wasn’t the local
community consulted. I’ll try to address both here by providing more
context into the decision and the process.

We recently selected Google as the default search partner for Firefox.
We carefully evaluated a number of partners and determined that Google
provided the best experience for the most number of people globally.
These arrangements are often global in nature; consequently, we were not
able to keep Yandex as the default search provider in the Firefox
Russian builds.

This was a difficult decision and it was not done lightly. Sadly, the
considerable attention and contemplation surrounding this decision is
lost in the mechanics of filing a change request in bugzilla. Yandex has
been a great partner. We have close ties to the individuals there and
respect them personally. Yandex has made positive contributions to
Firefox through its promotion and marketing and by providing innovative
search solutions. We also like that Yandex provides diversity in the
market because users benefit from the choice and competition they offer.

At the same time, Google has been a great partner over many years and
has supported both the project and the open web in many important ways
from the very beginning. Ofcourse we have our issues from time to time
as they do with us, but it doesn't negate the former or the most
important point - that they have a great global search product that
serves the needs of most users well.

There’s no denying that the revenues derived from integrated search and
commerce services are important. They provide the means to support the
global project we have today including the broad range of communities
and efforts around the world. Although sustainability is a critical
factor, it is however not the only factor. Google is the leading search
provider worldwide. It provides a competitive offering in Russia and in
almost every other region worldwide. Thus, on balance selecting Google
as the default made the most sense for the most users in a way that
allows the project to increase its investment in the mission through
projects like the B2G mobile OS, Firefox on Android, Persona, and the
web apps marketplace that aim to foster a viable, robust competitive web
platform.

The other group of questions centers around transparency. We aspire to
this as an important value in how we manage the affairs of the project.
In this case, both Yandex and Google are public companies and it is not
always possible to share in detail the arrangements and discussions
between the parties. We have no interest in violating those confidences
or sharing information that could adversely impact or advantage any one
party. Given these constraints, we did not deem it possible to socialize
this with the community in advance as we might normally do. This is an
unfortunate reality that we are bound by despite our goal to collaborate
with the community as transparently as possible.

Going forward, in Firefox Russian builds users will continue to have the
option to select Yandex from the pre-installed search list. Yandex also
continues to distribute a Yandex flavored version of Firefox with Yandex
set as the default search. In the future we'll continue to collaborate
with Yandex on new initiatives including new geos, mobile efforts, and
maybe even a B2G project in the future. While I have no belief that this
will convince anyone to change their opinion, I do hope that the above
information better explains the situation and our intent.
</quote>

Gerv

[Mitchell Baker]

Hi folks

I've got a few general comments. These aren't about specific
negotiations or interactions; they are about the general context.

First, it's easy for us to look at Firefox and think we should have
leverage. Remember that Google's search marketshare is 3 or 4 or 5
times Firefox's marketshare, way up in the high 90% range in many places.

At the same time, Google provides a search product that serves the needs
of most users very well. Selecting Google as the default made the

most sense for the most users in a way that allows the project to

increase our investment in our mission.

As to transparency and the NDA idea- this was a complicated situation
since we were negotiating with two publicly traded companies. Each of
these has obligations and requirements about how such data is handled,
which means extreme sensitivity and not broad sharing (this wasn't a
situation of paid vs. volunteer staff).

I don't know if an NDA with volunteer Mozillians would solve the
problem, esp if there are regulatory or employment issues involved. I do
think exploring how to get broader dispersal of information is a good
idea.

Mitchell

[Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu]

(12/06/12 17:09), Gervase Markham wrote:
> We should probably start with Harvey's statement on the issue from the bug:
>
> <quote>

> </quote>

I think Harvey's statement is a pretty good one for the public. It would
be nice to ask some local contributors to comment on this decision too,
I think. From I what I've observed, open source contributors who
interact with Bugzilla often would more appreciate the sheer existence
of Mozilla as a community-like open source project.

But if those contributors work for Yandex than that's indeed a bit
unfortunate.

(12/06/11 21:00), Nukeador wrote:
> 1. Don't we have the possibility to make pressure in these deals?
> It seems it's like google would drop the global agreement because
> of this and we can do anything even Yandex seems to be a better
> search engine for Russians.

This seems to touch the details of the deals, which I assume to be
non-public. I am curious about the scope of the "we" in the question
here though.

> 2. Several people in the community have signed confidentially
> clauses (Mozilla Reps), I don't see the point of not including
> Reps from Russia in the discussion even if it has to be done
> non-publicly.

(Speaking as a non-employee) As Mitchell indicates, this doesn't even
seem to be public information shared within the company. Also, I do have
certain doubts that whoever signed the confidentially clauses serious
read it.

At this point, I don't see the point of sharing the details of the deal
with Reps. It's the *public* who will question the deal. Sharing it with
a limited set of people and asking them to keep the secret don't seem to
be very helpful for the whole community.


Cheers,
Kenny

[kumar.m...@gmail.com]

On Monday, June 11, 2012 8:00:15 AM UTC-5, Nukeador wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since the change to Russian version from Yandex to Google and the
> controversy that seems to be happening on the bug comments, I would like to
> open discussion here to clarify all concerns:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761592

The people who lose out on this deal are Russian Firefox users. The reason Yandex is so successful is that they have a better implementation of Russian grammar (especially in how it differs between generations of Russian speakers) so their search experience is superior *in Russia*. It's shame that we have to reduce the quality of search in Russia just because 90% of everywhere else in the world gets a better search experience from Google. I know that our users can change the default search engine but defaults matter; we have the chance to offer a better default and now we're not. I understand why this decision was made but I want to point out its effects on our users.

[Majken Connor]

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:18 PM, <kumar.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, June 11, 2012 8:00:15 AM UTC-5, Nukeador wrote:

> > Hi,
> >
> > Since the change to Russian version from Yandex to Google and the
> > controversy that seems to be happening on the bug comments, I would like
> to
> > open discussion here to clarify all concerns:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761592
>

> The people who lose out on this deal are Russian Firefox users. The reason
> Yandex is so successful is that they have a better implementation of
> Russian grammar (especially in how it differs between generations of
> Russian speakers) so their search experience is superior *in Russia*. It's
> shame that we have to reduce the quality of search in Russia just because
> 90% of everywhere else in the world gets a better search experience from
> Google. I know that our users can change the default search engine but
> defaults matter; we have the chance to offer a better default and now we're
> not. I understand why this decision was made but I want to point out its
> effects on our users.

> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> gover...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
>


Yes, I understand myself, though I'm struggling with it just a little. For
a while it's been bragged about that l10n can even choose the best search
engine for their locale, so this is definitely something being given up for
money. We just have to make sure we don't make lots of decisions like this
that will add up, and do what we can to offset the cost. For example, if
the funds this arrangement brings in allows the Reps program to have more
resources then it still works out for the community.

One question: Is there anything in the terms of the agreement that would
prevent Russian community members from linking to Yandex's builds on their
sites? I'm assuming of course that Mozilla itself couldn't recommend users
grab Firefox from Yandex, but random people certainly can. Is Mozilla
expected to ask people to change their links if say a rep is promoting the
Yandex build?

[Alexander L. Slovesnik]

Hi Gervase Markham

12.06.2012 13:09 you wrote:
> On 11/06/12 14:00, Nukeador wrote:
>> Since the change to Russian version from Yandex to Google and the
>> controversy that seems to be happening on the bug comments, I would like to
>> open discussion here to clarify all concerns:
>>
>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761592
>
> We should probably start with Harvey's statement on the issue from the bug:

FWIW, we (Mozilla Russia) have repeatedly asked Mozilla to post
something like this statement in Mozilla's blog.
But we were told in
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761592#c7 that:

> Public post means the press release issued by Yandex. Beta blog post going out this week will have information about the change. There will be no other public post.

Harvey's post is buried in Bugzilla comments. Common users don't read
Bugzilla.

I also have 2 additional issues regarding the decision to change from
Yandex to Google:
1) I think that it's going to hurt Firefox marketshare in ex-USSR
countries. Yandex doesn't have single browser of choice to market.
Besides Firefox, they have custom builds of IE (http://ie.yandex.ru/),
Opera (http://opera.yandex.ru/) and Chromium
(http://browser.yandex.ru/). They promote all of them and don't
discriminate.
On the other side, Google is extremely aggressively promoting its
Chrome. From Google's point of view, Google Chrome is more equal then
all other browsers. So, unnevitably, after change from Yandex to Google,
some Firefox users will fall for Google's propaganda.
2) As things stand now, in few weeks time several million Firefox users
will suddenly find out that their search engine of choice suddenly has
been changed without their consent. Patch in
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761592 has changed default
browser. But it doesn't preserve user's choice of search engine in
current Firefox profiles in case when user's choice match default search
engine. I've filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=763230
to resolve this issue, but I don't see any activity in it.


--
Sincerely yours,
Alexander L. Slovesnik a.k.a. Unghost
==>Jabber ID: ung...@mozilla-russia.org
==>Gmail Talk ID: ung...@gmail.com
==>Twitter: http://twitter.com/unghost

[Asa Dotzler]

On 6/14/2012 11:51 AM, Alexander L. Slovesnik wrote:
> FWIW, we (Mozilla Russia) have repeatedly asked Mozilla to post
> something like this statement in Mozilla's blog. But we were told in
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761592#c7 that:
>
>> Public post means the press release issued by Yandex. Beta blog
>> post going out this week will have information about the change.
>> There will be no other public post.
>
> Harvey's post is buried in Bugzilla comments. Common users don't
> read Bugzilla.

What is it that you believe a Mozilla blog post (which, in case you have
wrong assumptions, "common users" don't read either) will accomplish
that is not accomplished by the press release issued by Yandex, the Beta
blog post, the in-product information going out to users, and the bug
report?

- A

[Alexander L. Slovesnik]

Hi Asa Dotzler

Have you read Yandex blog post -
http://company.yandex.com/press_center/press_releases/2012/2012-06-04.xml ?
Is there anything about change of default search engine in Russian
Firefox builds from Yandex to Google? No. Google is not even mentioned.
This post is absolutely useless.
Beta blog post doesn't mention it at all -
http://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2012/06/07/new-firefox-beta-adds-security-features-and-new-developer-tools/
In-production information (
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761648 ) also doesn't
mention the change at all. It just direct users to SUMO article on
changing default search plugins.
Perhaps "common users" doesn't read Mozilla blog post. Journalists and
bloggers do and repost (and translate, if nessesary) interesting
information. Common users read their blogs and news sites.

--
Sincerely yours,
Alexander L. Slovesnik a.k.a. Unghost
==>Jabber ID: ung...@mozilla-russia.org
==>Gmail Talk ID: ung...@gmail.com

==>Skype: alexander.slovesnik
==>Twitter: http://twitter.com/unghost

[Asa Dotzler]

What is it that you believe a Mozilla blog post will accomplish? Please
describe the outcome you are after here because I still don't understand
what your goal is.

- A

[Marek Stępień]

On Wednesday, June 13, 2012 7:15:34 PM UTC+2, Majken Connor wrote:
> Yes, I understand myself, though I'm struggling with it just a little. For
> a while it's been bragged about that l10n can even choose the best search
> engine for their locale, so this is definitely something being given up for
> money.

Note that while this issue technically applies only to the Russian version of Firefox, some other l10n teams are monitoring this closely.

We always thought that if there ever comes a day when there's a better search provider than Google in Poland, we would be able to switch to it in Firefox pl. This hasn't happened yet and most probably won't ever happen, but having this kind of freedom was important and empowering for the local teams.

Now we see this freedom does not, in fact, exist. What is worse, it seems it can be decided without even notifying the l10n team. That's really sad.

Let me just quote some principles from the Mozilla Manifesto here:

"3. The Internet should enrich the lives of individual human beings."

"8. Transparent community-based processes promote participation, accountability, and trust."

and one of the Manifesto goals:

"3. make Mozilla contributors proud of what we're doing and motivate us to continue"

How does this decision play with the Manifesto?


--
Marek Stępień
Firefox l10n leader, Aviary.pl
Mozilla Evangelism Rep

[Alexander L. Slovesnik]

Hi Asa Dotzler

On July 17, when Firefox 14 will be released, several millions of users
of Russian Firefox build will find out that their default search engine
has been changed without their consent. Some of them will come to our
local support forum to find out the reason behind this change.
I'd like to point users to an article or blog post in official Mozilla's
blog which explain this change. I don't have any.

[Asa Dotzler]

On 6/15/2012 1:13 PM, Alexander L. Slovesnik wrote:

>> What is it that you believe a Mozilla blog post will accomplish? Please
>> describe the outcome you are after here because I still don't understand
>> what your goal is.
>>
>
> On July 17, when Firefox 14 will be released, several millions of users
> of Russian Firefox build will find out that their default search engine
> has been changed without their consent. Some of them will come to our
> local support forum to find out the reason behind this change.
> I'd like to point users to an article or blog post in official Mozilla's
> blog which explain this change. I don't have any.
>

Would it suffice to simply copy and paste Harvey's comments from
Bugzilla into your support forum and reference that?

- A

[Majken Connor]

Why does it need to suffice? This is fact not conjecture, why be obscure
about it? I think it's insulting to the users this will effect to not stand
up and say something. Pointing to or copying from a bug comment makes it
look like Mozilla is trying to hide this.


On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Asa Dotzler <a...@mozilla.org> wrote:

> On 6/15/2012 1:13 PM, Alexander L. Slovesnik wrote:
>
> What is it that you believe a Mozilla blog post will accomplish? Please
>>> describe the outcome you are after here because I still don't understand
>>> what your goal is.
>>>
>>>
>> On July 17, when Firefox 14 will be released, several millions of users
>> of Russian Firefox build will find out that their default search engine
>> has been changed without their consent. Some of them will come to our
>> local support forum to find out the reason behind this change.
>> I'd like to point users to an article or blog post in official Mozilla's
>> blog which explain this change. I don't have any.
>>
>>

> Would it suffice to simply copy and paste Harvey's comments from Bugzilla
> into your support forum and reference that?
>
> - A
>
>

> ______________________________**_________________
> governance mailing list
> gover...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/**listinfo/governance<https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance>
>

[Rubén Martín]

El 16/06/12 00:51, Majken Connor escribió:

> Why does it need to suffice? This is fact not conjecture, why be obscure
> about it? I think it's insulting to the users this will effect to not stand
> up and say something. Pointing to or copying from a bug comment makes it
> look like Mozilla is trying to hide this.

Agree, and let's hope this conversation is not taken out of context by
media or blogs before we can react.

So if you are not part of mozilla community and your are reading this,
please, read all messages first and wait till we reach a consensus
before drawing a conclusion ;)

Regards.

--
Rubén Martín [Nukeador]
Mozilla Reps Council Member
http://www.mozilla-hispano.org
http://twitter.com/mozilla_hispano
http://facebook.com/mozillahispano

[Asa Dotzler]

On 6/15/2012 3:51 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
> Why does it need to suffice? This is fact not conjecture, why be obscure
> about it? I think it's insulting to the users this will effect to not stand
> up and say something. Pointing to or copying from a bug comment makes it
> look like Mozilla is trying to hide this.

This is a Russian change which impacts Russian users. It is not a global
change and does not need raise to the level of a global Mozilla blog
post, IMO. It's not about hiding anything. It's about speaking to the
right audience.

The Russian support forums seem like the perfect place to address the
the problem that the Russian community leaders have raised -- users
coming to those forums looking for help. If you don't like copy and
paste, perhaps we can ask Harvey to post to the Russian support forum.

(And you're completely ignoring the fact that we will talk directly to
the users in the product itself, in the most direct way we can, so this
"insults the user" thing is total nonsense.)

I'm more than happy to help the Russian community support program help
the users that come to them, and that's what they've asked for. The
assumption that the only or even most effective way to help there is a
global Mozilla blog post is wrong and suggesting that failing to do that
is us trying to hide something is insulting to the people who have spent
considerable time and effort thinking about this and how to best help
effected users.

- A

> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Asa Dotzler <a...@mozilla.org> wrote:
>

>> On 6/15/2012 1:13 PM, Alexander L. Slovesnik wrote:
>>
>> What is it that you believe a Mozilla blog post will accomplish? Please
>>>> describe the outcome you are after here because I still don't understand
>>>> what your goal is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> On July 17, when Firefox 14 will be released, several millions of users
>>> of Russian Firefox build will find out that their default search engine
>>> has been changed without their consent. Some of them will come to our
>>> local support forum to find out the reason behind this change.
>>> I'd like to point users to an article or blog post in official Mozilla's
>>> blog which explain this change. I don't have any.
>>>
>>>

[Majken Connor]

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Asa Dotzler <a...@mozilla.com> wrote:

> On 6/15/2012 3:51 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
>
>> Why does it need to suffice? This is fact not conjecture, why be obscure
>> about it? I think it's insulting to the users this will effect to not
>> stand
>> up and say something. Pointing to or copying from a bug comment makes it
>> look like Mozilla is trying to hide this.
>>
>
> This is a Russian change which impacts Russian users. It is not a global
> change and does not need raise to the level of a global Mozilla blog post,
> IMO. It's not about hiding anything. It's about speaking to the right
> audience.
>

It is a global change in that no l10n team can change the default search
now, if I understand correctly.

>
> The Russian support forums seem like the perfect place to address the the
> problem that the Russian community leaders have raised -- users coming to
> those forums looking for help. If you don't like copy and paste, perhaps we
> can ask Harvey to post to the Russian support forum.
>
> (And you're completely ignoring the fact that we will talk directly to the
> users in the product itself, in the most direct way we can, so this
> "insults the user" thing is total nonsense.)
>

And you're being incredibly confrontational with people who are trying to
do the best thing for their users. Equating being obscure with insulting
isn't total nonsense, and I hope Mozilla feels strongly about that. I think
the problem here is that Alexander is asking for something with an
explanation. I imagine the in-product notification will just notify of the
change so the reasoning would still be "obscure."

>
> I'm more than happy to help the Russian community support program help the
> users that come to them, and that's what they've asked for. The assumption
> that the only or even most effective way to help there is a global Mozilla
> blog post is wrong and suggesting that failing to do that is us trying to
> hide something is insulting to the people who have spent considerable time
> and effort thinking about this and how to best help effected users.
>
> - A
>

I don't think anyone else is saying these are the only choices. I pointed
out what is wrong with relying on a link to a bugzilla comment as the
public statement to share with affected users. For me it feels a little odd
that Harvey would post on a forum that he doesn't normally post on to make
a statement when he does have his own blog he makes statements on and
there's the l10n blog as well (maybe that's more appropriate?), but if a
forum post satisfies the parties directly involved than that's good.

>
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Asa Dotzler <a...@mozilla.org> wrote:
>>

>> On 6/15/2012 1:13 PM, Alexander L. Slovesnik wrote:
>>>
>>> What is it that you believe a Mozilla blog post will accomplish? Please
>>>
>>>> describe the outcome you are after here because I still don't understand
>>>>> what your goal is.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On July 17, when Firefox 14 will be released, several millions of
>>>> users
>>>> of Russian Firefox build will find out that their default search engine
>>>> has been changed without their consent. Some of them will come to our
>>>> local support forum to find out the reason behind this change.
>>>> I'd like to point users to an article or blog post in official Mozilla's
>>>> blog which explain this change. I don't have any.
>>>>
>>>>

>>>> Would it suffice to simply copy and paste Harvey's comments from
>>> Bugzilla
>>> into your support forum and reference that?
>>>
>>> - A
>>>
>>>

>>> ______________________________****_________________
>>> governance mailing list
>>> gover...@lists.mozilla.org
>>> https://lists.mozilla.org/****listinfo/governance<https://lists.mozilla.org/**listinfo/governance>
>>> <https://**lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/**governance<https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance>

[Alexander L. Slovesnik]

Hi Asa Dotzler

Our support forum is an unofficial source of information. If Mozilla
could copy and paste Harvey's comments in blog post on
http://blog.mozilla.org/ or something else, syndicated on
http://planet.mozilla.org/, it would be enough.

[Alexander L. Slovesnik]

Hi Asa Dotzler

16.06.2012 03:04 you wrote:
> On 6/15/2012 3:51 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
>> Why does it need to suffice? This is fact not conjecture, why be obscure
>> about it? I think it's insulting to the users this will effect to not stand
>> up and say something. Pointing to or copying from a bug comment makes it
>> look like Mozilla is trying to hide this.
>
> This is a Russian change which impacts Russian users. It is not a global
> change and does not need raise to the level of a global Mozilla blog
> post, IMO. It's not about hiding anything. It's about speaking to the
> right audience.
>
> The Russian support forums seem like the perfect place to address the
> the problem that the Russian community leaders have raised -- users
> coming to those forums looking for help. If you don't like copy and
> paste, perhaps we can ask Harvey to post to the Russian support forum.
>
> (And you're completely ignoring the fact that we will talk directly to
> the users in the product itself, in the most direct way we can, so this
> "insults the user" thing is total nonsense.)
>
> I'm more than happy to help the Russian community support program help
> the users that come to them, and that's what they've asked for. The
> assumption that the only or even most effective way to help there is a
> global Mozilla blog post is wrong and suggesting that failing to do that
> is us trying to hide something is insulting to the people who have spent
> considerable time and effort thinking about this and how to best help
> effected users.

I don't require to make post in Mozilla's official blog. Post in
Harvey's blog - http://lockshot.wordpress.com/ - will be enough, because
it's syndicated on Planet too. Previous change of default search engine
had been announced in Harvey's blog -
http://lockshot.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/exploring-partnership-with-yandex/
It would be logical to announce current change of default search engine
also in Harvey's blog.

[Axel Hecht]

On 16.06.12 10:56, Majken Connor wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Asa Dotzler <a...@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>> On 6/15/2012 3:51 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
>>
>>> Why does it need to suffice? This is fact not conjecture, why be obscure
>>> about it? I think it's insulting to the users this will effect to not
>>> stand
>>> up and say something. Pointing to or copying from a bug comment makes it
>>> look like Mozilla is trying to hide this.
>>>
>>
>> This is a Russian change which impacts Russian users. It is not a global
>> change and does not need raise to the level of a global Mozilla blog post,
>> IMO. It's not about hiding anything. It's about speaking to the right
>> audience.
>>
>
> It is a global change in that no l10n team can change the default search
> now, if I understand correctly.

Ever since Firefox 1, the local configuration of Firefox is, as last
resort, determined by Mozilla. That very discussion is how I got
involved with l10n in the first place back in the days.

The local communities provide input, but the actual decisions and
negotiations with partners are done by a mozilla organization
encorporated in the US, foundation or corporation, depending on time.

So much for the past.

Also, we've made a decision to change the default search provider for
Russia now. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

Axel

[Konstantin Lepikhov]

On Saturday, June 16, 2012 3:04:33 AM UTC+4, Asa Dotzler wrote:
<skip>

> This is a Russian change which impacts Russian users. It is not a global
> change and does not need raise to the level of a global Mozilla blog
> post, IMO. It's not about hiding anything. It's about speaking to the
> right audience.

But how Mozilla prove that sentence? Russia is the biggest EMEA region and Mozilla silently ignores them for years (well, counting together with Asia). And now Mozilla just throw away whole community opinion for "world average level". Okay.

As in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364297 its possible to manage such changes correctly and carefully for community. But now several millions of users who choose chrome browsers doesn't affect "world average level". Okay.

>
> The Russian support forums seem like the perfect place to address the
> the problem that the Russian community leaders have raised -- users
> coming to those forums looking for help. If you don't like copy and
> paste, perhaps we can ask Harvey to post to the Russian support forum.

Why we need to ask Harvey for doing that if Mozilla have own resources? Why we need such "special move"?

>
> (And you're completely ignoring the fact that we will talk directly to
> the users in the product itself, in the most direct way we can, so this
> "insults the user" thing is total nonsense.)

See the originating bug. Mozilla already made the change. And there is no users around.

>
> I'm more than happy to help the Russian community support program help
> the users that come to them, and that's what they've asked for. The
> assumption that the only or even most effective way to help there is a
> global Mozilla blog post is wrong and suggesting that failing to do that
> is us trying to hide something is insulting to the people who have spent
> considerable time and effort thinking about this and how to best help
> effected users.
>
> - A

According current situation with Firefox marketing and promotion Yandex helps Russian Mozilla community much better that MoFo and Google together.

[Konstantin Lepikhov]

On Saturday, June 16, 2012 3:04:33 AM UTC+4, Asa Dotzler wrote:
<skip>

> This is a Russian change which impacts Russian users. It is not a global
> change and does not need raise to the level of a global Mozilla blog
> post, IMO. It's not about hiding anything. It's about speaking to the
> right audience.

But how Mozilla prove that sentence? Russia is the biggest EMEA region and Mozilla silently ignores them for years (well, counting together with Asia). And now Mozilla just throw away whole community opinion for "world average level". Okay.

As in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364297 its possible to manage such changes correctly and carefully for community. But now several millions of users who choose chrome browsers doesn't affect "world average level". Okay.

>

> The Russian support forums seem like the perfect place to address the
> the problem that the Russian community leaders have raised -- users
> coming to those forums looking for help. If you don't like copy and
> paste, perhaps we can ask Harvey to post to the Russian support forum.

Why we need to ask Harvey for doing that if Mozilla have own resources? Why we need such "special move"?

>

> (And you're completely ignoring the fact that we will talk directly to
> the users in the product itself, in the most direct way we can, so this
> "insults the user" thing is total nonsense.)

See the originating bug. Mozilla already made the change. And there is no users around.

>

> I'm more than happy to help the Russian community support program help
> the users that come to them, and that's what they've asked for. The
> assumption that the only or even most effective way to help there is a
> global Mozilla blog post is wrong and suggesting that failing to do that
> is us trying to hide something is insulting to the people who have spent
> considerable time and effort thinking about this and how to best help
> effected users.
>
> - A

[Gervase Markham]

On 16/06/12 18:36, Alexander L. Slovesnik wrote:
> I don't require to make post in Mozilla's official blog. Post in
> Harvey's blog - http://lockshot.wordpress.com/ - will be enough, because
> it's syndicated on Planet too. Previous change of default search engine
> had been announced in Harvey's blog -
> http://lockshot.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/exploring-partnership-with-yandex/
> It would be logical to announce current change of default search engine
> also in Harvey's blog.

That seems entirely reasonable logic to me.

I think Harvey is currently either on holiday or dealing with personal
matters, but if you send him a polite email, I hope he will be able to
do that when he returns.

Gerv

[Gervase Markham]

On 16/06/12 09:56, Majken Connor wrote:
> It is a global change in that no l10n team can change the default search
> now, if I understand correctly.

It is certainly important to clarify if this is the case.

If Mozilla's position is "we give our l10n teams as much freedom as
possible, but we have to make an exception for search engine choice and
placement because that's how we get the money to pay for the project"
then I think people would understand that.

But a lot of people seem to have been under the impression that the
process for changing the search engine for a locale involves at least
consulting the community leaders in that locale, even if they don't get
a veto. If that's not the case, we need to make it clear.

Gerv

[Axel Hecht]

There's not enough occasions of choice globally to create a process. If
we had a different dominating provider in each region, there probably
would be a process, to the extent that the talks with those entities
would share patterns.

The yandex-change is, as the few other changes we did (yahoo and back) a
one-off situation, and we shouldn't over-generalize it.

Also, the very few guys that know the mozilla-side of the story are
under NDAs with the other companies involved, and thus, can't talk about
it. I don't expect that there's a single human being on the planet that
actually knows the mozilla-side of the story *and* the rationales of the
other companies as to why we shouldn't do what we usually do.

The default remains as it was, we'll try to get the community involved
beyond those community members that had been here. (Yeah, I'm looking at
Harvey, Gary, Mitchell, they're in that bucket in my book.)

But we can only do that to the extent that our partners allow us to do that.

Axel

[Konstantin Lepikhov]

Hi Gervase!

On 06/19/12, at 03:20:03 PM you wrote:

> On 16/06/12 09:56, Majken Connor wrote:

> > It is a global change in that no l10n team can change the default search
> > now, if I understand correctly.
>

> It is certainly important to clarify if this is the case.
>
> If Mozilla's position is "we give our l10n teams as much freedom as
> possible, but we have to make an exception for search engine choice and
> placement because that's how we get the money to pay for the project"
> then I think people would understand that.

Right now problem arise not from restrictions for communities but from
strange differences between 1st and 2nd searches in the list.

> But a lot of people seem to have been under the impression that the
> process for changing the search engine for a locale involves at least
> consulting the community leaders in that locale, even if they don't get
> a veto. If that's not the case, we need to make it clear.

What about Mozilla Manifesto update?

--
WBR et al.

[Axel Hecht]

On 19.06.12 00:15, Konstantin Lepikhov wrote:
> On Saturday, June 16, 2012 3:04:33 AM UTC+4, Asa Dotzler wrote:
> <skip>
>> This is a Russian change which impacts Russian users. It is not a global
>> change and does not need raise to the level of a global Mozilla blog
>> post, IMO. It's not about hiding anything. It's about speaking to the
>> right audience.
> But how Mozilla prove that sentence? Russia is the biggest EMEA region and Mozilla silently ignores them for years (well, counting together with Asia). And now Mozilla just throw away whole community opinion for "world average level". Okay.
>

Konstantin, that's not true.

There's an important difference between "ignoring a region" and "the
expectations on both sides don't come together".

There are cultural differences between the US and Russia, or India, or
Asia. Californians in particular expect some things to happen, and other
not to happen. OTH, I've heard quite a bit of conflicting expectations
from folks in Russia, in India, or Asia.

And of course, the expectations from Russia, India, or Asia are mutually
conflicting as well :-)

Axel

[Gervase Markham]

On 19/06/12 17:19, Konstantin Lepikhov wrote:
>> If Mozilla's position is "we give our l10n teams as much freedom as
>> possible, but we have to make an exception for search engine choice and
>> placement because that's how we get the money to pay for the project"
>> then I think people would understand that.
>
> Right now problem arise not from restrictions for communities but from
> strange differences between 1st and 2nd searches in the list.

I'm afraid I don't quite understand what you are saying here. Can you
explain more?

>> But a lot of people seem to have been under the impression that the
>> process for changing the search engine for a locale involves at least
>> consulting the community leaders in that locale, even if they don't get
>> a veto. If that's not the case, we need to make it clear.
>
> What about Mozilla Manifesto update?

The Mozilla Manifesto is a statement of general principles about what we
believe, rather than a document detailing how the Mozilla community is
governed. So I don't think it's quite the right place for detailing our
policy about search engine default changes. :-)

Gerv

[Jean-Marc Desperrier]

Axel Hecht a écrit :

> Also, we've made a decision to change the default search provider for
> Russia now. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

A decision that results in Russian users getting a default search engine
that is massively acknowledged as inferior in this part of the world,
and will hurt Firefox market share there.

This in favor of a partner that is spending millions of dollars
promoting another browser, and pushing all Firefox users who visit it's
homepage to install it in replacement of their current browser.

The problem for me is not really that this decision was taken behind
closed doors because of NDA's, but probably that this caused it to not
include the right people to evaluate it. It does sound like nobody
involved in the confidential discussions really had enough knowledge to
evaluate precisely what the impact was for Russian users. Were the two
engine for Russian users like Bing to Google, or Lycos to Google ?

I can understand the monetary reasons that motivates this, but I think
in the long term it's a bad strategic decision. And it sends a bad
message about Mozilla. This is a step in the direction that led Netscape
to ship encumbered with a lot of default links that were of no value to
users, but in the short term profitable to the company.

One positive step would be for Firefox to ask after the update of an
existing installation if the user wants to keep Yandex as his default
search engine, or is OK with the switch to Google. It would be one way
to make sure all Russian users are at least aware of the change.

[Rubén Martín]

El 20/06/12 13:11, Jean-Marc Desperrier escribió:

> This in favor of a partner that is spending millions of dollars
> promoting another browser, and pushing all Firefox users who visit
> it's homepage to install it in replacement of their current browser.

In this case I think users never see the front page when using the
search bar, but it brings something that maybe it's part of another
discussion, where our main funding income is a site that aggressively
promote another browser even to users that get there thanks to an
agreement.

Maybe it's fair to review the agreement to terms where google doesn't
promote his browser to Firefox users hitting the search pages using the
search bar.

[Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu]

(12/06/20 0:37), Axel Hecht wrote:
> There are cultural differences between the US and Russia, or India, or
> Asia. Californians in particular expect some things to happen, and other
> not to happen. OTH, I've heard quite a bit of conflicting expectations
> from folks in Russia, in India, or Asia.

Sort of off-topic, but do you have a blog post about the kind of
difference? Or if you don't feel like sharing that with the public, can
you share that with me? I am just very curious.

The observation I have is that, not about Asia in general but the
Mozilla Taiwan community (MozTW) which I belong to, MozTW is a lot less
technical than community in North America, so we as whole care more
about issues like this (and we are quite active by the way).

(12/06/20 19:11), Jean-Marc Desperrier wrote:
> I can understand the monetary reasons that motivates this, but I think
> in the long term it's a bad strategic decision. And it sends a bad
> message about Mozilla.

Not sure this is the right forum to discuss this, but I don't think
marketing share by itself can promote open choice. The fact that this
forum (I doubt you can debate default search engine in the Opera
community), MDN where I learned Web technology from, nice people
answering questions on bugzilla, and, needless to say, faster browser
engine exist all require money, and I am happy that Mozilla managed to
get a deal in a difficult situation like this.

I myself don't quite care what the default search for zh-TW is, and
that's why I said if there's a core contributor in Russian who can help
Russian users understand these, that would be helpful. (I don't think we
can still revert this business decision.)

> This is a step in the direction that led Netscape to ship encumbered
> with a lot of default links that were of no value to users, but in
> the short term profitable to the company.

Not quite a good comparison. Netscape wasn't open sourced and it had
little value to the community (at least as far as I can tell).


Cheers,
Kenny

[Konstantin Lepikhov]

Hi Kang-Hao!

On 06/24/12, at 12:22:53 AM you wrote:

<skip>

> > I can understand the monetary reasons that motivates this, but I think
> > in the long term it's a bad strategic decision. And it sends a bad
> > message about Mozilla.
>
> Not sure this is the right forum to discuss this, but I don't think
> marketing share by itself can promote open choice. The fact that this
> forum (I doubt you can debate default search engine in the Opera
> community), MDN where I learned Web technology from, nice people
> answering questions on bugzilla, and, needless to say, faster browser
> engine exist all require money, and I am happy that Mozilla managed to
> get a deal in a difficult situation like this.

It's not the first deal like this (see originating bugzilla discussion)
and Mozilla behaves there very "closed company" way.

>
> I myself don't quite care what the default search for zh-TW is, and
> that's why I said if there's a core contributor in Russian who can help
> Russian users understand these, that would be helpful. (I don't think we
> can still revert this business decision.)

So why you are writing this if you are not care? Excuse me, I couldn't
understand that.

>
> > This is a step in the direction that led Netscape to ship encumbered
> > with a lot of default links that were of no value to users, but in
> > the short term profitable to the company.
>
> Not quite a good comparison. Netscape wasn't open sourced and it had
> little value to the community (at least as far as I can tell).

Any open-source software useless for community without solid market
position (or any solid social position). If we talk such way, Firefox ==
links/curl/wget/whatever in 3-4 years without help from volunteers cause
Chromium/Webkit will more popular and open for developers.

--
WBR et al.

[Konstantin Lepikhov]

[Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu]

(12/06/24 1:59), Konstantin Lepikhov wrote:
>> I myself don't quite care what the default search for zh-TW is, and
>> that's why I said if there's a core contributor in Russian who can help
>> Russian users understand these, that would be helpful. (I don't think we
>> can still revert this business decision.)
>
> So why you are writing this if you are not care? Excuse me, I couldn't
> understand that.

I care about the community. I couldn't understand why you couldn't
understand that.

For what's worth, I do think MoCo should explain more to the community.
I am only providing my explanation and trying to help the Russian
community identify a community member who can stand on Mozilla's side
and explain more to the community, which I think is what this discussion
is about at the beginning: about explaining things to the community, not
about judging whether this is the right thing to do.

>>> This is a step in the direction that led Netscape to ship encumbered
>>> with a lot of default links that were of no value to users, but in
>>> the short term profitable to the company.
>>
>> Not quite a good comparison. Netscape wasn't open sourced and it had
>> little value to the community (at least as far as I can tell).
>
> Any open-source software useless for community without solid market
> position (or any solid social position).

I have no doubt about this. What I said was "I don't think
marketing share by itself can promote open choice". I of course don't
know the detailed trade off.

> If we talk such way, Firefox == links/curl/wget/whatever in 3-4 years
> without help from volunteers cause Chromium/Webkit will more popular
> and open for developers.

I am happy to believe that provided that:

* You give me a pointer to a Chromium/Webkit issue where there's a
discussion like this one.
* You give me a pointer to a Chrome/Safari mailing thread where a
discussion like this one is happening.

This is what I was I was trying to say: if you ever play with the WebKit
bugzilla (or get a Russian community folk who has played both), you'll
realized it is as closed as you can ever imagine. If something like this
happened there, the most likely outcome is that you'll just get ignored.

I actually wish Mozilla take over WebKit so that it is more community-like.


Cheers,
Kenny