Re: [Reps-General] Words from a Mozillian Part II

Skip to first unread message

matthew zeier

Feb 19, 2015, 2:16:23 PM2/19/15
to Mozilla Reps - General Discussion mailing list,, Chris Beard,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

> We have seen volunteers & Staffs leaving Mozilla and joining organizations that totally opposes the Mozilla mission,

I have a pretty strong reaction to that statement.

As a former paid-staff myself, I'll put it this way:

You can take me from the mission but you can not take the mission from me.

Wherever I go - and wherever other Mozilla Alumni go - we take those core Mission values with us. It's just impossible to live those values for any length of time - 7 years in my case - and not. I'll point to someone like Christian Heilmann going to Microsoft as an extreme measure of success.

And I think that's excellent. And I think the real challenge for Mozilla is to learn how to leverage those Alumni as we march throughout the world.

The rest of your note was hard to digest as it was too ad hominem and thus an ineffective argument.

Majken Connor

Feb 19, 2015, 3:23:58 PM2/19/15
to matthew zeier, Chris Beard,,,,,,,,,,, Mozilla Reps - General Discussion mailing list,,,,,
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 the program, Brian had Rosana's role for a short
time, but not enough time to "ruin" the program. Also, both Brian and Ruben
worked with myself, Vineel, Viking, Guillermo, Rami, Pierros and William Q
in creating the program. In terms of setting policy it was always discussed
between us 9. While William and Pierros certainly deserve extra credit for
driving the program and doing behind the scenes work, if you like the
program you have to give just as much credit to Vineel, Ruben and Brian.

I can also say that transparency has been an issue from the beginning, this
isn't new. William and Pierros deserve as much blame for that as the rest
of us.

Obviously a lack of transparency is partly to blame for your misconceptions
on where the problems lie and who caused them. However, I just put a lot of
work into running a council AMA that didn't get much participation. This
was a great chance to find out more about Council, in fact I asked this
question myself to help people better understand how the program is run -

I also tried to start a discussion to better understand what is currently
considered private as well as to advice council and leadership on what we
think should be changed. The participation on that pad, discussion, and
Discourse topic can be counted on one hand.

While I agree with some of the concerns you raise, I have no respect for
your group. You have obviously avoided the chances given to help provide
constructive feedback and even participate in solving the problems. When I
make these threads and call for feedback and get none, it makes me look
controlling, and high strung and like I'm focusing on details that no one
else cares about. I start to sound like the squeaky wheel and then people
start to ignore me. So to be left hanging like that it makes me respect you
even less and gives me no faith that you actually want to see a solution.
If you want to change my mind, start participating.
> _______________________________________________
> mozillians mailing list

Benjamin Kerensa

Feb 19, 2015, 3:40:05 PM2/19/15
to Dicky Moe, Chris Beard,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I want to start off by encouraging you to dialogue with those teams
you feel need
improvement. I do not think an anonymous email to all these lists
including many that
really play no role in the issues you raise helps move your issues forward.

The ad hominem attacks are really unnecessary and that coupled with
the anonymity of this
email really makes this email disruptive versus productive.

“we also would like to thank Benjamin Kerensa, Emma Irwin and Majken
Connor for all
the efforts they take in making things more transparent.“

Thanks for appreciating our efforts for transparency but on the same
token if you
value transparency and openness then lend your name to your criticism and try
to keep the the criticism constructive.

Otherwise, on some of the valid issues you have raised, we cannot move
the dial forward
and improve.

I invite you to join those discussions where they are
relevant on the individual mailing lists
versus blasting Mozilla Governance and all these other individual
people and individual mailing lists.

If, for some reason, there is a barrier preventing you from
participating in discussion then please reach
out to a conductor and try to work through that. Also, if for some
reason you feel like you really just
cannot participate in one area of Mozilla then there are certainly
other areas of the project you can plug in.

Mozilla isn’t perfect after all we are a community of humans that all
error but this kind of anonymous
dialogue does not help move things forward.

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Dicky Moe <> wrote:
> Hello everyone this is Dicky Moe, again. We are sad to join again and write up. We just want to make some points clear before you dig yourself in.
> We went anonymous not because we are afraid. There is no reason for us to be!
> # Mozilla its paying for our daily bread, but it does provide us community spirit which is vital for Mozillians because once mozillian you are mozillian forever, we don’t want a bunch of dictators ruin what we’ve all stood up for.
> # If you still want us to reveal our names that would be the last thing the community want to get. (Black spread faster and easily, but hard to wash )
> # Most people have got themselves in trouble raising the community issues and finally end up leaving the community. We are not ready for that! At Least not before completing the projects we took up.
> We have seen volunteers & Staffs leaving Mozilla and joining organizations that totally opposes the Mozilla mission, Internal issues are the main cause whatever they post on blogs or statements is just for personal satisfaction because Mozilla has been diffused in the blood. Let's hope it doesn't happen to most of us. Please spend less time scrutinizing the literature and immature use of caps or grammar and choice of file sharing program :) Instead, please read and reflect on the issues being raised.
> We don't feel overwhelmed by all the responses against our mail. It's easier to speak in support. And since our previous mail sounded a little immature with all the caps, special effects and background score. People are probably thinking that they are all just lies and uncalled for.
> But keep in mind that for every person who expressed an opinion against our action, there are many who shared our view and let us know their support through PM, but are just afraid to speak out publicly. One of the most abused sentences in the Mozilla community is “this is an open community”. Well, we hate to break it to you: it is not!
> [1]MozFest
> -----------------
> Did the council lose all their fingers or keys on the keyboard, we/community had not received any reply for the concerns raised...? “The Selection process”.
> We are shocked to see the council not keeping its own words, waiting for the 2-3 Sentence explanation for the persons selected. Can we expect the answer before Mozfest 2015.?
> We never thought we needed to look here, but, we were forced to, after the so called ‘qualified reps’ according to the Reps Council who attended the Mozfest weren’t doing what they were intended to do after all, the following links proves it
> If so happened then why were those reps invited….?
> (Thanks Priyanka for sharing, hope you won’t remove it. In case if the above link is not available by the time you read it, here is a screenshot of it )
> Congrats you just made the majority of hardworking Mozillians made look fool because those selected were enjoying London it seems. Do you still have anything to say about this?
> [2]Reps Council
> ----------------------
> As always Reps program has managed to stay as the headquarters of problems or the tensions. We are very sad to see the heading of the Reps program.
> The work of WilliamQ & Pierros to help community reach Mozilla faster was superb, but we have to say, my friends, you have failed to manage it or take it forward. We have no objections to your actions and idea of Reps but you are still responsible for transferring unaccountable control to people who weren’t up for the task - manage and guide the community.
> Community management is a very tough task, In an organization like Mozilla It’s the only task that has to be dealt seriously after the Main Products. We are sad for having to mention names and go personal here.
> We don't know what you guys do during the in-person meetings every time in luxurious locations. There has never been any visible improvements in Reps program in recent times. All we had is cursing from all directions and volunteers leaving the program. The commitment of Reps program can be measured just by looking at the number of people voting to select the council member. People have just lost faith with more and more dictatorial dominating the Reps program. The Reps program has given unlimited powers in many decision making processes which make many mozillians hard to work with all those diplomacy.
> Brian King, Ruben (we have a special section for you), Vineel, Gautham Raj, Robert Bob Ryes, Mahay Alay Khan(MAK) you guys are the worst community persons anyone could have met. You have managed to ruin the community by breaking the openness. If you try to get yourself away stating that you’re gonna improve from your current standing, it has no meaning here. If/when replying, please keep bombast and rhetoric to their minimum - in simple words, avoid BS; give facts.
> Brian King - The guy before Ruben, who have sat managing Mozilla Reps and started the process of running the community. This guy simply haven't done any sort of help when asked. Instead, he has sided with many community members who claim themselves as “liaisons” or community leads(we wonder what these guys have done other than having trips and getting the credits of work done by others) especially in the Asian region and back stabbed many other hardworking mozillians.
> Ruben - Scroll down bud, we haven’t reached yours yet.
> Robert Bob - You have been one hell of a pain for a lot of mozillians in the community. First of all, you have to understand Mozilla is not solely yours and mind your language when talking to community members. You have given very little respect and have taken direct word attacks in many mails which has caused some uneasiness for many people.
> Vineel - We have heard from many community members how you played silently in the back and take credit for stuffs that you haven't even heard of. You soap or sugar coats the Mozilla staffs a lot that no one dares say anything even the community members. You have your group who gets to represents mozilla for everything that involves luxury and make community members look like fools. Don’t play nice because the truth can’t be hidden for long. We guess there are more members who have left the community because of your unflavored policies. You have been sticking and proclaiming as the head of the regional community for long (Does any one know who made him the lead, by the way). We have seen some great minds leaving from your community, which you also seem to have left and yet your name still shows up on every event Mozilla budgets, is it only us who see this…?
> And in general, we must have elections, choosing the head of the community and one can’t simply sit forever and dictate with his buddies. This happens in many communities, Vineel's dictator managed the first position in the list making a perfect example for this email. MAK standing second, we’re observing you too on this one. You have caused political divisions in Bangladesh community. The domain issue and more... Ruben and more we are watching all
> Gauthamraj - This guy is a Webmaker contractor now? We just don't know how these people are qualified to do such works for Mozilla. These are not posted anywhere. Was there any open call for this or anything on the Careers page? Isn’t that how “Open” works? Concerned authorities please explain
> [3]Mentor selection
> ----------------------------
> As far we see each Rep has a mentor, but what we have no idea is who they are and how they came to be one..? No official invitation or nomination news in any of the lists.
> It seems like the one who is connected with a council get a position in council- Political bribery?
> [4]Community IT
> -----------------------
> Who the hell do you think you are Ruben..?.
> We know you have been with mozilla and community since 6+ years, all the mozillians including you, have been breathing same mission so far, but please bear in mind that Mozilla is not your Family Asset…? You might have the veteran’s syndrome (, you should check that out.
> Congratulation for joining Reps Council, but don’t think you can establish a dictatorship over a community that supports openness. As council we value your action only in areas or the fields assigned to you, but that doesn't mean you have the ultimate decision on any things other than the ones stated to you.
> Your reactions to these areas have-not been fruitful to community with communication, your replies in bug 1121901 ( especially the reply in comment#11 has been very arrogant - the kind that people who manage communities shouldn’t display. Not to mention the reaction at
> Learn to respect other mozillians! Or better yet, other humans in general. Your works so far to Mozilla has been great, but you are doing more damage than good now and you are trying your best to achieve a bad name to your profile and you are being successful in that.
> [5]Reps application endorsement
> -----------------------------------------------
> Mr. Ruben, according to your comment, an applicant need to get endorsed on his Reps application form, from those who vouched the applicant’s mozillians profile. When did this new approach make?
> Who made this decision? Did Mentors approve this? Did you inform to the broader reps community about this stupid change?
> What if the applicant gets vouches from a non-rep mozillian? How he can endorse his vouchee’s application then? What if the voucher is no more available. The unlucky applicant can’t be a rep?
> What we demand/request:
> # End the dictatorial working of Reps council and mentors. A clear selection process for mentor selection and contesting in council has to be implemented.
> # An open way to kick a council /mentor/rep if he/she is unfit. Open votes have to be taken against the council and mentors to reason if they are working the way they should be. And this vote has to be public and not in some hidden locker at the councils side desk.
> # Mozilla is not just a Reps program and those who proclaim themselves as the head has to understand that other mozillians also help in shaping the Open Web. Try to respect everyone.
> # Transparency in selection process. We have sent a doc in the last email of how immature and biased the selection were for a regional level event. Shame on you people.
> # While having done the criticism, we also would like to thank Benjamin Kerensa, Emma Irwin and Majken Connor for all the efforts they take in making things more transparent. We just need people like you at the important positions so that some inexperienced and closed minded people don't end there, for example Ruben. We expect bold people like you to come forward.
> # Allow participation of all the volunteers in the decision making process, irrespective of position - at least in the major decision making process and in all cases.
> We are not here to make the organization look bad. We trust this organization’s mission to the core and we are dreaming for a safe and open web. But we can't achieve any, if the status continues. Lets constructively discuss the above problems and not our literature or who we are.
> Many people have reached us (PM) claiming problems so if anyone feels anything need to be addressed in open feel free to mail us.
> Regards
> Fellow Mozillians
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list

Benjamin Kerensa
Mozilla Rep

Sofien Chaabouni

Feb 19, 2015, 4:28:21 PM2/19/15
to Dicky Moe, Chris Beard,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
This is not mainly people like WilliamQ, Pierros, Brian or Ruben who were
the cause of what is happening now! but can be the choice of goals (one
million, and firefoxOS webmaker) that have imposed changes and swapping

The Reps program was exactly what Mozilla is looking for to give volunteers
a status also to organize financially their activities. Although the
success pushed William and Pierros to review the program and try to adapt
it to the coming ... ( The huge number of Reps, the appearing of Firefox OS
and Webmaker )

In the meantime, Mozilla launched the "OneMillion" goal that was (for me) not
really the best time to do it. for several reasons ( The lack of tools and
programs to achieve this goal ). This same goal caused that WilliamQ and
Pierros will not continue their adventure to "fix" the Reps Program then
they joined the CBT (that vanished recently for reasons I ignore). With all
the work they had, it was hard to find time to mentor the new leaders of
the Reps program which caused the malfunction of today and it's not Brian
nor the council's fault.

I am aware that the program is not fully transparent but there has to be
some ideas and suggestions to help (and I am certain that no one can tell
you not to)
*Chaabouni Sofien *


Feb 21, 2015, 3:33:38 PM2/21/15
to Mozilla Reps - General Discussion mailing list,, Chris Beard, Dicky Moe,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I think we have the same problem that in countries democracy, we know
that something is bad but most people is not working on a fix, a few
will raise their voices to exprime their inconformity and blame about
others without pointing a "right" path.

As in countries democracies most people aren't interesting in the
decision making architecture, we want just to be customers using a
program "well designed" by others and when we try to participate we
don't found tools to do it and/or we have language barriers because
english is not our first language. I think we can learn from Open
Source Software using repositories to manage our program architecture
definition, SOPs ... but honestly I think no much people will use this

Just now we have a restricted wiki but we can't fork it to experiment
and propose changes, this is a very vertical project but is working in
the fact that we are getting resources for events.

I think must uf us, we are expecting (dreaming) things like
distributed decision making, consensus ... because that match with out
values but in the other hand people payed by Mozilla are
results-oriented. In practice we can't be more that endusers for this
program using it AS-IS because we don't have resources (money/time) to
rebuild the program architecture to match with our values and we don't
know if doing it the program will really works.

If resources allocation is working why not simply remove the
"community-driven" propaganda and find a better why to talk about the
7+2 power concentration
> _______________________________________________
> reps-general mailing list

ATT: Fredy Pulido López, +1 procurando un mejor mundo para todos.

Guillermo Movia

Feb 22, 2015, 3:41:55 PM2/22/15
to digitalfredy, Mozilla Reps - General Discussion mailing list,, Dicky Moe,,,,,,,, Chris Beard,,,,,,
Hi Fredy (comments inline)

El 21/02/15 a las 17:32, digitalfredy escibió:
Probably this program doesn't match your "community-driven" criteria,
but call it propaganda seems too much. Since the beginning, like Majken
wrote in other email, members of the community work in the design of the
project, and since then, lots of community members were mentors and part
of the council, taking decisions and moving the project forward.

In my point of view, that is community driven. Yes, we don't work in
consensus with all the reps. Maybe in the future, but taking all
decisions by consensus seems quite difficult.

And like many others says, lot of the changes in the program were taken
in Remo Camps (were not only council members go) and by open and public
changes proposals in the mailing list. So your 7+2 power concentration
is not quite right.

Dependency on the language is a problem, but that's is a global problem,
not only a Mozilla one.
Guillermo Movia


Feb 23, 2015, 5:00:27 PM2/23/15
to Guillermo Movia,, Dicky Moe,,,,,,,, Chris Beard, Mozilla Reps - General Discussion mailing list,,,,,,
My point of view is easy to understand whit this example, If Remo is
community-driven because we can chose council members and we have
spaces like Remo Camps, then our countries are citizen-driven because
we can chose politicians and we have participative tools. so this
world is perfect related with politics/decision making.

In other words, representative structures can't guarantee a true
representation, their decision making is not a mirror from the base,
and we will not resolve it in a mailing list discussion, until now we
are using this structure because we don't now how to made works
something more horizontal and distributed.

If you have a problem with the 7+2 power concentration you can propose
another structure but I think it is realistic because in a more
distributed structure the problem is that no much people have time or
interest in to exercise their power. is also more complex and require
more effort.

Lawrence Kisuuki

Feb 23, 2015, 5:44:01 PM2/23/15
to Mozilla Reps - General Discussion mailing list, Guillermo Movia,, Dicky Moe,, Chris Beard,,,,,,,,,,,

I'm sorry but just removing the Community Uganda mailing list from this
thread due to the email bomb complaints.



*Lead MozFestEA*

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:59 AM, digitalfredy <>
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages