Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn’t live up to it. We know why people are hurt and angry, and they are right: it’s because we haven’t stayed true to ourselves.
We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act. We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We’re sorry. We must do better.
Brendan Eich has chosen to step down from his role as CEO. He’s made this decision for Mozilla and our community.
Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard.
Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all.
We have employees with a wide diversity of views. Our culture of openness extends to encouraging staff and community to share their beliefs and opinions in public. This is meant to distinguish Mozilla from most organizations and hold us to a higher standard. But this time we failed to listen, to engage, and to be guided by our community.
While painful, the events of the last week show exactly why we need the web. So all of us can engage freely in the tough conversations we need to make the world better.
We need to put our focus back on protecting that Web. And doing so in a way that will make you proud to support Mozilla.
What’s next for Mozilla’s leadership is still being discussed. We want to be open about where we are in deciding the future of the organization and will have more information next week. However, our mission will always be to make the Web more open so that humanity is stronger, more inclusive and more just: that’s what it means to protect the open Web.
We will emerge from this with a renewed understanding and humility — our large, global, and diverse community is what makes Mozilla special, and what will help us fulfill our mission. We are stronger with you involved.
officers, i’m afraid you can’t arrest me for murder. when i murdered that guy, i was only doing it to highlight how ridiculous and wrong is to murder someone. it was actually quite anti-murder if you think about it. i understand how you might make that mistake, but next time i hope you don’t take my actions out of context :^)
(And then it turned out from the recap episode that Israfel wasn’t the burning one or the crying one or possibly non-Euclidean foghorn, which was what I’d guessed, so ????. The only angels that have made sense so far are shark teeth/the angle of fishermen and Adam**.)
* Ten was wrong, so I’m gunning for twelve now. Or possibly ninety-nine.
** Calling it right now: The Evas are made from the lower half of Adam and Powered By the Soul of a Forsaken Mother.
You know how people buy drinks for girls in bars? Why can’t people do that in book stores? Like if I’m looking at a novel in Barnes and Noble and some person walks up to me and strikes up a conversation and offers to buy the book for me there is a lot better chance of that working out in their favor
I’m going to reblog this until it’s a cultural norm.
I kind of want a YA dystopia book where someone learns the Horrible Truth about their society…and just shrugs it off and goes on to support the regime, because of cognitive dissonance/their family/ambition/honor and duty/whatever.
And for it to be portrayed as a sympathetic choice, and not just have this person made a straw man of a character.
So, a Quidditch match at Hogwarts, right? Slytherin vs Gryffindor (yeah yeah obvious, I know shut up). And all of a sudden there’s this STAMP STAMP CLAP from the Gryffindor stand and all the Muggle-borns start singing/screaming WE WILL ROCK YOU across the pitch towards the Slytherins. And then there’s this little pause while the Muggle-born Slytherins (you know those fuckers are there, don’t deny it) have a really speedy chat, and then they retaliate with WHO LET THE DOGS OUT?!
and the wizards are just standing there like what the fuck is going on??
yeah but lets be real here if it meant I could live in a world with completely free healthcare and take tours across entire countries on foot with superpowered animal/else companions I would fight a hundred fucking beedrill at once naked with only a butter knife
Yeah, don’t forget the post-Bane Rule of Two. NOT FUN.
I forgot about that, too! I’ve been playing a lot of Star Wars: The Old Republic, so I’m mainly thinking about that time period.
I don’t really understand the Rule of Two, though. Like, I get that part of it was to keep the Jedi from realizing that there were still Sith around, but.
I don’t know, couldn’t you have, like, ten? Ten is a good number. They’d probably end up killing each other and slimming that down a bit, too. But it makes it much less likely for something to happen and kill all TWO of you, finalizing the destruction of the Sith.
Let’s be smart about our evil, guys,
Well, according to Wookiepedia, Bane noticed that a main problem with the Sith was that you’d end up with one Master taking on several apprentices, and then the apprentices would team up and kill the Master. Then they’d kill each other until only one remained, but the problem was that none of the apprentices would have learned all the Master had to teach, so the Sith would be weakened overall.
As for why two instead of ten…because I don’t think Bane wanted any infighting, beyond the passing on of the role of Master to the Apprentice at the end. I mean, the Rule of Two conveniently began with him in the position of the Master (and while I haven’t read the Bane books, it probably was “Rule of Ten” until Bane established himself as the only Sith?), and I’m sure none of the following Masters were like, “Hey, I want more rivals!”
I also suspect that there might have been a lot of “no true Sith” fallacying, in the line of “well those are Dark Jedi and not Sith because I AM THE REAL SITH and I am part of the line that learned directly from Darth Bane”
…also Rule of Two sounds cooler than Rule of Ten, and it’s easier to retcon in. ;)
I think the Rule of Two was self-fulfilling, in a way, with the only part that required codifying being the whole “take on an apprentice” thing? (And that, I think, was more for convenience than anything else - having an apprentice is mighty convenient for getting things done.) Sith masters probs don’t want that many rivals, and it turns out that when you train an apprentice using grueling, painful, and mind-manipulating methods while simultaneously teaching them to embrace their lust for power and anger, they will really want to kill you.
…I don’t even know why I’m defending it I only like it because it sounds cool. xD