3 ms·

Please tell me, how is server dying, need immediate replacement "made up"? How is a flood disaster in organizational building "made up"? Sure, I made them up on

Please tell me, how is server dying, need immediate replacement "made up"? How is a flood disaster in organizational building "made up"? Sure, I made them up on a whim, but they're based on real scenarios that restricted funding may not cover.

notyourday 7y ago
Not my monkey, not my circus. Here's a way to avoid having to deal with restrictions on the funds raised from people: become a regular company that sells a product.
- jshowa3 7y ago
  Considering Mozilla created a browser designed to do its best to not track people, and private companies don't do this, I can't see your point other than being bad faith. Yeah, have Mozilla become a private company, beholden to shareholders and profit. Look how that turned out for companies that supposedly coined the "Don't be evil" motto.
  - notyourday 7y ago
    That was before. Now Mozilla is not even committed to ensuring that ad blockers work. Sort of like long time ago Google was "don't be evil" company that made web better. Plus, there's nothing that prevents others from donating their money without restrictions for the "good of Mozilla"
martin_a 7y ago
Sorry if I was misunderstandable. What I mean is that those limitations are made up. You just have to clearly state what you want to do with the money and that will fix those problems. Obviously restricted funds are nothing that is set up in 5 minutes, but I would expect that somebody really thinks about that. And if you state that up to 10% of the restricted funds might also be used for any other projects of Mozilla, that might be okay. Something like "your fund will be used for maintaining the infrastructure necessary to provide downloads of the latest binaries" would also be totally fine for me in terms of "buy a new server for this whenever you need it", be it a flooding or just the old server dying. But that obviously does not cover putting money into whatever shiny project is prioritized right now and might die in a year or less. Otherwise you'll have a cash cow project that finances everything else. While that might be nice for one side, the other side would love to know that their funds are used to improve the already good product.
- jshowa3 7y ago
  According to 501c3 law, the funding must be restricted to whatever the donor suggests or rejected. I mean if you suggest adding every single condition to your donation, you're not really helping the organization at all. Otherwise you'll have a cash cow project that finances everything else. While that might be nice for one side, the other side would love to know that their funds are used to improve the already good product. It's a holistic endeavor. Improving the product includes getting it in the hands of a lot of people, making decisions during conflicting ideas, writing better code, etc. Restricted funding only hampers this on the perceived notion that the organization is stupid and will waste it all. There's no indication Mozilla will do this.
  - notyourday 7y ago
    So? There's nothing that prevents people who think like you from donating to the Mozilla general funds. People who do not think like you should be taught to donate to restricted funds. Why make people who would like to support development of the privacy first browser support decision of Mozilla to lease class A office space in a slew of expensive cities?

notyourday 7y ago

Not my monkey, not my circus. Here's a way to avoid having to deal with restrictions on the funds raised from people: become a regular company that sells a product.

jshowa3 7y ago
Considering Mozilla created a browser designed to do its best to not track people, and private companies don't do this, I can't see your point other than being bad faith. Yeah, have Mozilla become a private company, beholden to shareholders and profit. Look how that turned out for companies that supposedly coined the "Don't be evil" motto.
- notyourday 7y ago
  That was before. Now Mozilla is not even committed to ensuring that ad blockers work. Sort of like long time ago Google was "don't be evil" company that made web better. Plus, there's nothing that prevents others from donating their money without restrictions for the "good of Mozilla"

martin_a 7y ago

Sorry if I was misunderstandable. What I mean is that those limitations are made up. You just have to clearly state what you want to do with the money and that will fix those problems. Obviously restricted funds are nothing that is set up in 5 minutes, but I would expect that somebody really thinks about that. And if you state that up to 10% of the restricted funds might also be used for any other projects of Mozilla, that might be okay. Something like "your fund will be used for maintaining the infrastructure necessary to provide downloads of the latest binaries" would also be totally fine for me in terms of "buy a new server for this whenever you need it", be it a flooding or just the old server dying. But that obviously does not cover putting money into whatever shiny project is prioritized right now and might die in a year or less. Otherwise you'll have a cash cow project that finances everything else. While that might be nice for one side, the other side would love to know that their funds are used to improve the already good product.

jshowa3 7y ago
According to 501c3 law, the funding must be restricted to whatever the donor suggests or rejected. I mean if you suggest adding every single condition to your donation, you're not really helping the organization at all. Otherwise you'll have a cash cow project that finances everything else. While that might be nice for one side, the other side would love to know that their funds are used to improve the already good product. It's a holistic endeavor. Improving the product includes getting it in the hands of a lot of people, making decisions during conflicting ideas, writing better code, etc. Restricted funding only hampers this on the perceived notion that the organization is stupid and will waste it all. There's no indication Mozilla will do this.
- notyourday 7y ago
  So? There's nothing that prevents people who think like you from donating to the Mozilla general funds. People who do not think like you should be taught to donate to restricted funds. Why make people who would like to support development of the privacy first browser support decision of Mozilla to lease class A office space in a slew of expensive cities?