3 ms·
At least in my eyes and I suppose in the eyes of other techies and open Web idealists: Because Mozilla became just another classic corporation that's laser-foc
by pdimitar 5y ago
At least in my eyes and I suppose in the eyes of other techies and open Web idealists:
Because Mozilla became just another classic corporation that's laser-focused on extracting value for shareholders and executives and nothing else. A year or two ago an article about Mozilla made the rounds here: executives collecting fat bonuses (and some leaving afterwards?). Some mere months later they fired a lot of people.
Is that the right signal to send to a community that wants an open Web browsing experience? Squeeze any money you can and then fire staff. Those pesky people that have the audacity to want money for their work, how dare they!
As the (currently) top commenter @selfhoster11 says, cut out everything that's not Firefox or is not related to its mission.
I could probably agree to use some of their other offerings like Pocket or VPN, assuming they're done well. Mozilla needs the diversified income, like badly. They are at the mercy of Google and always have been. *THIS IS NOT OKAY* and should have been addressed like 10 years ago. If the expenses are so huge, well, again, fire everyone who's not working on Firefox or closely related to it.
Finally, Mozilla needs no "executives". Get a CEO, CTO and CFO who are passionate about the mission, get rid of everyone else at the top. It's a semi-charity organization, the hell does it need a board of directors for?
- selfhoster11 5y agoThanks for the call-out. I think you make an excellent point about them becoming just another corporation. I don't donate money to them for that exact reason. If there was some way for my donations to get routed straight to the Firefox team, even with enormous inefficiencies and percentage cuts, I'd still do it because I want the open web to exist. As it stands, I have no way to support that ideal monetarily.
- butlerm 5y agoA board of directors is more important for a non-profit organization than for a for-profit one. They are part time, serve in a non-executive role, and are in charge of the overall direction of the enterprise, and for a non-profit organization are usually supposed to represent the general, public interest since non-profits have no shareholders to represent. The Mozilla Foundation is a 501(c)(3) and so that goes double for them.
- selfhoster11 5y agoWhat enterprise? It's not rocket science, they are building a web browser. They are supposed to have just enough layers of management to be a thin wrapper between Firefox developers and the outside world. Collect donations, make sure developers are working on Firefox and get paid on time each month. That's all the community needs and that's all the community is asking for.
- pdimitar 5y agoWell, they don't seem to do what they are supposed to do then. I don't think such an organization should give away golden parachutes (fat executive bonuses, including on the way out), yet they did so a few times. And yeah I know the Foundation and the Corporation are separate. Potato tomato. Point is, they should not act like a corporation. But they do, and they'll kill Firefox, that seems a very likely possibility at this point.