Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements page
| |||||||||||||
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction
Mitchell Baker has posted an initial version of the Mozilla Foundation statement of direction, describing what the Foundation is trying to do. "The Mozilla Foundation seeks to effectuate these goals both by building broadly-used products that impact Internet development as a whole, and by empowering people to act in highly decentralized, experimental ways. The work of creating general consumer products that influence broad aspects of Internet development is currently handled through the Mozilla Corporation. The Foundation plans to increase its direct involvement in other activities which enable people to participate in the development and enjoyment of the Internet in a decentralized, self-directed manner."
(Log in to post comments)
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 7, 2007 18:30 UTC (Wed) by vmole (guest, #111) [Link] "Effectuate"? Is he trying to sound like a no-nothing marketroid? Mr. Baker, the word you are looking for is "achieve."
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 7, 2007 18:49 UTC (Wed) by ca9mbu (guest, #11098) [Link] I'd like to point out that Mithcell's female.
I didn't even realise that 'effectuate' was a real word. Like you, I
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 7, 2007 19:07 UTC (Wed) by vmole (guest, #111) [Link] Oops, sorry about that, Ms. Baker. Marketroids use imaginary/uncommon words to distract us from the fact the the actual sentences mean nothing. Consider "The Mozilla Foundation seeks to effectuate these goals both by building broadly-used products that impact Internet development as a whole, and by empowering people to act in highly decentralized, experimental ways." Even after you translate the buzzwords, it means *nothing*. There's nothing measurable there. After all, IE is a broadly-used product that has impacted Internet development, but I wouldn't be proud of that...
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 7, 2007 19:11 UTC (Wed) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] While the marketroid speech should be cleaned up, the statement is not meaningless.Mozilla's code does enable people to "act in highly decentralized, experimental ways" in a way that IE does not; the wide variety of third-party plugins, as well as third-party software like Democracy Player that embed Mozilla are illustrations of that.
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 7, 2007 19:34 UTC (Wed) by vmole (guest, #111) [Link] There's lots of third-party plugins for IE. IE can be and is embedded in other software, both from MS and third parties. I'm not dissing Mozilla. It's an impressive piece of work. But there's nothing "decentralized" about it, either in its development process or in its use (at least, nothing more than any other browser provides). I know what "decentralized" means w.r.t. source code management tools, and that was a true innovation. But I've got no idea how Mozilla allows people "to act in highly decentralized, experimental ways" that isn't similar to other browsers. Yeah, it's free software, but that's hardly a Mozilla innovation, and look how long it took the to get *that* right.
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 8, 2007 9:55 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] Of course, use of synonyms for the same word is entirely despicable. The English language would be much richer and more expressive if there was only one word for a given concept.
(i.e., the problem is not the specific words they use --- of course `effectuate' is a `real' word, coined in ways that English-speakers have used to form new words for almost a thousand years --- but that their jargon is, like postmodernist argot, intended to appear impressive at the expense of clarity.)
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 8, 2007 10:45 UTC (Thu) by irios (guest, #19838) [Link] Words such as "effectuate", "incentivate" or "nucleus", more than coined by native English-speakers, sound as coming from a native romance language speaking person, like me. We, when in lack of a complicated English word such as "enact", "reward" or "core", find the easy way in transposing the latin one, which often exists in cultivated English although it is usually too pedantic.
But then, Mitchell is a native English speaker, so the reason she uses those words is probably that she is simply a pedantic marketroid.
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 8, 2007 22:50 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] `Incentivate' sounds iffy to me: `incentivi[sz]e' is probably what youmeant.
And `nucleus' is attested since 1704, with the modern (non-physics)
There's nothing wrong with importing Latinate words. That's where half of
I'd agree that it's possible to go too far, e.g. the immortal work of
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 8, 2007 19:59 UTC (Thu) by vmole (guest, #111) [Link] I don't object to synonyms. I object to the incorrect use of an obscure word in an attempt to make something sound impressive. "Effectuate goals" is correct (barely) only if one is talking about the *creation* of goals, not reaching them.
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 8, 2007 22:51 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] Ick, you're right: the *usage* is wrong. I guess that meansmarketroid-speak isn't Mitchell's native language and she was reaching ;))
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 23, 2007 18:21 UTC (Fri) by pimlott (guest, #1535) [Link] You think that marketroids know what the words they use mean?
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 7, 2007 21:11 UTC (Wed) by job (guest, #670) [Link] Well get off your high horses and start helping the distributions to actually use your stuff. Mozilla wouldn't exist without the free software and not playing fair with the rest of the world (trademarks or copyright law aside -- when a distribution isn't allowed to actually use and maintain your software, that's a problem) is a lousy way of saying thank you.
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 9, 2007 10:27 UTC (Fri) by gerv (subscriber, #3376) [Link] Which distribution isn't allowed to use and maintain our software? Name one.
What you actually mean is they aren't allowed to call it Firefox, and piggy-back on the enormous amount of brand recognition, quality reputation and goodwill that the project has built up over the past two years, unless they cooperate with us to make sure they aren't shipping something which doesn't have the level of quality people have come to expect.
Why does it upset you that you can't call it Firefox? It's the same code, after all. The only reasons must be marketing, rather than technical. Which is fine, but at least agree to that rather than claiming it's about "being forbidden to use or maint
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 9, 2007 10:29 UTC (Fri) by gerv (subscriber, #3376) [Link] ...ain." Oops.
Mozilla Foundation Statement of Direction Posted Mar 23, 2007 18:45 UTC (Fri) by pimlott (guest, #1535) [Link] Why does it upset you that you can't call it Firefox?For one, it is outside the norms of the free software world in which Mozilla has its roots. And it may hurt Firefox's image by fracturing the user community and hindering the spirit of unity and cooperation. I, for one, like and use a Firefox-based browser, but I would feel better if it were called "Firefox", not some idiotic parody name Debian came up with. Finally, it seems unlikely to me that modifications made by distributors (however much Mozilla dislikes them) will harm the Firefox image. I understand that Mozilla is blazing new trails for free software, and the outcome of this experiment will only be evident in retrospect. But I feel that the Linux community is the natural support base for Mozilla, and that the trademark policy weakens this support for minimal benefit.
|
|||||||||||||