3 ms·

I believe in Mozilla.and their products. as much as they need to get their admin/ceo pay down.as much as they need to adjust the new Android Firefox UI Unless

I believe in Mozilla.and their products. as much as they need to get their admin/ceo pay down.as much as they need to adjust the new Android Firefox UI Unless there is another foundation with a browser promoting a free and open internet, my vote will always remain with them.

admiral33 6y ago
Why does the ceo pay need to go down?
- Zekio 6y ago
  Her pay is currently IIRC 2.4 million dollars a year
- throw_m239339 6y ago
  > Why does the ceo pay need to go down? Because salary X4 didn't result in financial performance X4, just 250 people fired.
foobiekr 6y ago
The problem with your view is that the purpose of most nonprofits, as revealed by their actual spending, is to act as a well-paying job for their administrators and a volunteer/exploitation scheme. They aren’t really about the mission. This is as clear as it could be for Mozilla.
- mgbmtl 6y ago
  There's a catch-22 in there, a touch of cynicism, which I understand. However, ideally you want well paid employees who are not exploiting volunteers? I doubt there are many stats on this, but my experience is that most nonprofits don't exploit volunteers. Firefox rolls out solid releases and improvements, month after month. Presumably that means that their employees are doing something good somewhere? I know there are a ton of essential volunteers too, but the project would struggle without a paid core and infra. As a developer and as a user, I get a lot of value for free out of Firefox. I barely do anything to give back, except perhaps to try and 'push it forward' in the FOSS project I am partially paid to work on. In our project, I get a bit rattled when people say we are going against their interests, when we have to make choices to ensure the financial stability of the project, and also to respond to requests from the greater (less-vocal) community. I'm obviously partial, but I'll give Firefox/Mozilla the benefit of the doubt.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    > However, ideally you want well paid employees who are not exploiting volunteers? Notice how you said "employees" here. Yes, employees should be well paid. Then, ideally, the high level administration should be kept small and paid similar amounts or only a little bit more than the employees.
- riffraff 6y ago
  don't the USA have regulations for non-profits to spend a significant part of their income on their mission? Of course, this doesn't mean it's well spent, but it means some non insignificant part of the money benefits someone else.
cxr 6y ago
> Unless there is another foundation with a browser promoting a free and open internet, my vote will always remain with them. And therein lies the problem. No matter how bad Mozcorp is at doing what mozilla.org was supposed to be about, then as long as it exists, it will always manage to be a black hole swallowing up any enthusiasm and effort that might otherwise be put to good use.
Zenbit_UX 6y ago
What don't you like about the new android UI? I've been using it for about a week now and I quite like it.

admiral33 6y ago

Why does the ceo pay need to go down?

Zekio 6y ago
Her pay is currently IIRC 2.4 million dollars a year
throw_m239339 6y ago
> Why does the ceo pay need to go down? Because salary X4 didn't result in financial performance X4, just 250 people fired.

foobiekr 6y ago

The problem with your view is that the purpose of most nonprofits, as revealed by their actual spending, is to act as a well-paying job for their administrators and a volunteer/exploitation scheme. They aren’t really about the mission. This is as clear as it could be for Mozilla.

mgbmtl 6y ago
There's a catch-22 in there, a touch of cynicism, which I understand. However, ideally you want well paid employees who are not exploiting volunteers? I doubt there are many stats on this, but my experience is that most nonprofits don't exploit volunteers. Firefox rolls out solid releases and improvements, month after month. Presumably that means that their employees are doing something good somewhere? I know there are a ton of essential volunteers too, but the project would struggle without a paid core and infra. As a developer and as a user, I get a lot of value for free out of Firefox. I barely do anything to give back, except perhaps to try and 'push it forward' in the FOSS project I am partially paid to work on. In our project, I get a bit rattled when people say we are going against their interests, when we have to make choices to ensure the financial stability of the project, and also to respond to requests from the greater (less-vocal) community. I'm obviously partial, but I'll give Firefox/Mozilla the benefit of the doubt.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  > However, ideally you want well paid employees who are not exploiting volunteers? Notice how you said "employees" here. Yes, employees should be well paid. Then, ideally, the high level administration should be kept small and paid similar amounts or only a little bit more than the employees.
riffraff 6y ago
don't the USA have regulations for non-profits to spend a significant part of their income on their mission? Of course, this doesn't mean it's well spent, but it means some non insignificant part of the money benefits someone else.

cxr 6y ago

> Unless there is another foundation with a browser promoting a free and open internet, my vote will always remain with them. And therein lies the problem. No matter how bad Mozcorp is at doing what mozilla.org was supposed to be about, then as long as it exists, it will always manage to be a black hole swallowing up any enthusiasm and effort that might otherwise be put to good use.

Zenbit_UX 6y ago

What don't you like about the new android UI? I've been using it for about a week now and I quite like it.