Matthew Garrett: Mozilla and leadership
A post I wrote back in 2012 got linked from a couple of the discussions relating to Brendan Eich being appointed Mozilla CEO. The tldr version is "If members of your community doesn't trust their leader socially, the leader's technical competence is irrelevant". That seems to have played out here.In terms of background[1]: in 2008, Brendan donated money to the campaign for Proposition 8, a Californian constitutional amendment that expressly defined marriage as being between one man and one woman[2]. Both before and after that he had donated money to a variety of politicians who shared many political positions, including the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman[3].
Mozilla is an interesting organisation. It consists of the for-profit Mozilla Corporation, which is wholly owned by the non-profit Mozilla Foundation. The Corporation's bylaws require it to work to further the Foundation's goals, and any profit is reinvested in Mozilla. Mozilla developers are employed by the Corporation rather than the Foundation, and as such the CEO is responsible for ensuring that those developers are able to achieve those goals.
The Mozilla Manifesto discusses individual liberty in the context of use of the internet, not in a wider social context. Brendan's appointment was very much in line with the explicit aims of both the Foundation and the Corporation - whatever his views on marriage equality, nobody has seriously argued about his commitment to improving internet freedom. So, from that perspective, he should have been a fine choice.
But that ignores the effect on the wider community. People don't attach themselves to communities merely because of explicitly stated goals - they do so because they feel that the community is aligned with their overall aims. The Mozilla community is one of the most diverse in free software, at least in part because Mozilla's stated goals and behaviour are fairly inspirational. People who identify themselves with other movements backing individual liberties are likely to identify with Mozilla. So, unsurprisingly, there's a large number of socially progressive individuals (LGBT or otherwise) in the Mozilla community, both inside and outside the Corporation.
A CEO who's donated money to strip rights[4] from a set of humans will not be trusted by many who believe that all humans should have those rights. It's not just limited to individuals directly affected by his actions - if someone's shown that they're willing to strip rights from another minority for political or religious reasons, what's to stop them attempting to do the same to you? Even if you personally feel safe, do you trust someone who's willing to do that to your friends? In a community that's made up of many who are either LGBT or identify themselves as allies, that loss of trust is inevitably going to cause community discomfort.
The first role of a leader should be to manage that. Instead, in the first few days of Brendan's leadership, we heard nothing of substance - at best, an apology for pain being caused rather than an apology for the act that caused the pain. And then there was an interview which demonstrated remarkable tone deafness. He made no attempt to alleviate the concerns of the community. There were repeated non-sequiturs about Indonesia. It sounded like he had no idea at all why the community that he was now leading was unhappy.
And, today, he resigned. It's easy to get into hypotheticals - could he have compromised his principles for the sake of Mozilla? Would an initial discussion of the distinction between the goals of members of the Mozilla community and the goals of Mozilla itself have made this more palatable? If the board had known this would happen, would they have made the same choice - and if they didn't know, why not?
But that's not the real point. The point is that the community didn't trust Brendan, and Brendan chose to leave rather than do further harm to the community. Trustworthy leadership is important. Communities should reflect on whether their leadership reflects not only their beliefs, but the beliefs of those that they would like to join the community. Fail to do so and you'll drive them away instead.
[1] For people who've been living under a rock
[2] Proposition 8 itself was a response to an ongoing court case that, at the point of Proposition 8 being proposed, appeared likely to support the overturning of Proposition 22, an earlier Californian ballot measure that legally (rather than constitutionally) defined marriage as being between one man and one woman. Proposition 22 was overturned, and for a few months before Proposition 8 passed, gay marriage was legal in California.
[3] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/02/controversial-mozilla-ceo-made-donations-right-wing-candidates-brendan-eich
[4] Brendan made a donation on October 25th, 2008. This postdates the overturning of Proposition 22, and as such gay marriage was legal in California at the time of this donation. Donating to Proposition 8 at that point was not about supporting the status quo, it was about changing the constitution to forbid something that courts had found was protected by the state constitution.
Back in 2007 I stumbled over the "Plus Fours Routefinder", an invention of the
1920's. It's worn on the wrist and allows the user to scroll through a map of
the route they planned to take, rolled up on little wooden rollers.
Zoe slept pretty well last night. She only woke up briefly at 4am because
Cowie had fallen out of bed and she couldn't find her.
Today was the last Playgroup of the term. Megan, her little sister and her Dad
came as well to check it out, which was nice, because Zoe then had someone to
actively play with in addition to me.
After Playgroup, we went to the adjacent Bulimba Memorial Park with Megan, and
then had some lunch at Grill'd. Megan's Dad wanted to do some work on their
house while Megan's little sister napped, so I offered to give Megan a play
date at our place.
The plan was to watch a movie and chill out. The girls picked
Ratatouille and I made a batch of popcorn for them. Unfortunately
Megan seemed to be less of a square eyes than Zoe, and she lost interest after
a bit, so we stopped watching the movie and moved out to the balcony to do some
craft.
Zoe had been wanting to make a crown for Mummy's boss for a while, so we made a
couple of crowns with the hot glue gun. I had bought this bag of mixed craft
"jewels" and it's probably the best single craft thing I've bought. Zoe
loves gluing them onto everything.
After that, Zoe pulled out the bag of coloured foil confetti. If the gems were
the best thing I've bought, this would have to be the worst. So far, all it's
done is leak in the drawer it's been stored in, and I've been avoiding using it
because it was going to be messy.
Today, Zoe wanted to glue it onto the outside of her cardboard box, so I
decided to give in and embrace the mess, and boy, did we make a mess.
It probably ended up being the longest bit of cooperative play the girls did.
They'd alternate between handing each other a fistful of confetti while I
applied globs of glue where directed. Probably about 10 percent of each handful
ended up stuck to the rocket, so the balcony looked like quite a mess by the
end of it all, but at least it was a dry mess, so I could just vacuum it all
up. I suspect I'll be encountering dregs for quite a while, because I doubt
it's stuck to the cardboard particularly well.
After that, the girls played indoors for a bit, and watched a bit more of the
movie, but Megan seemed to be scared of Anton Ego, so I think that was why
it wasn't holding her attention.
The other activity that the girls seemed to thoroughly enjoy was tearing around
the living room squealing while they took turns at throwing a grapefruit-sized
beach ball at me, and I threw it back at them.
Jason came back to pick up Megan, and I started dinner. Not that long after
Megan left, Sarah arrived to watch Zoe for me so I could go visit my cousin in
hospital. I had dinner on the table pretty much as soon as she walked in the
door, and headed out.
I would like to publicly apologise for the inconvenience caused by my
recent updates to the mediawiki and mediawiki-extensions
source packages in Debian wheezy (stable-security).
As for reasons I m doing Mediawiki-related work at my dayjob, as part
of
Continuing with my tendency to vent about stuff, today I want to talk about telephony.
Since a few years ago, I need to use different VoIP providers to keep in touch with friends and family, in different parts of the world.
So, I have a
The annoucement below just went to the
Out of laziness, like many, I use WordPress for this blog. I did try others, but was disappointed (after my blog got hacked a few times), so I just use that.
WordPress has a long history of security issues. So upstream decided to preform automatic updates. This would have been a good thing if automatic update didn t completely mess my blog each and every single time.
On my hosting system, PHP scripts have to be chmod +x to be executed. Otherwise, there s a error, and Apache wont execute the PHP script. The same way, an error will happen if a directory is world writable (eg: chmod 777). This is in order to prevent some of the most common hacks: a hacker finds a way to upload a PHP script (often via a feature of the hosted software), and then uses the uploaded script to do nasty things (like installing phishing sites, send spam, you name it ). Checking on these basic unix rights prevents uploaded scripts to be executed, and it s normally a way harder for hackers to find a way to chmod the PHP scripts than it is to just upload it.
Unfortunately, WordPress, on each upgrade, is resetting these unix rights. Someone got to explain to me the reason why it absolutely needs to chmod 777 the hosted folders, and why it wouldn t keep the chmod +x on the php scripts. Direct result? My blog often gets completely broken by these automated updates. And I didn t find a way to disable them (if someone knows, please send me a quick email).
I have reported the bug upstream: https://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/27568
I've been with Flickr since 2005 now, posting a lot of my photos there, so that other poeple from the events, that I usually take photos of, could enjoy them. But lately I've become annoyed with it. It is very slow to uplaod to and even worse to get photos out of it - there is no large shiny button to Download a set of photos, like I noticed in G+. So I decided to try and copy my photos over. I am not abandoning or deleting my Flickr account yet, but we'll see.
The process was not as simple as I hoped. There is this FlickrToGpluss website tool. It would have been perfect .. if it worked. In that tool you simply log in to both services, check which albums you want to migrate over and at what photo size and that's it - the service will do the migration directly on their servers. It actually feeds Google the URLs of the Flickr photos so the photos don't even go trought the service itself, only metadata does. Unfortunately I hit a couple snags - first of all the migration stopped progressing a few days and ~20 Gb into the process (out of ~40 Gb). And for the photos that were migrated their titles were empty and their file names were set to Flickr descriptions. Among other things that meant that when you downloaded the album as a zip file with all the photots (which was the feature that I was doing this whole thing for) you got photos in almost random order - namely in the order of their sorted titles. Ugh. So I canceled that migration (by revoking priviledges to that app on G+, there is no other way to see or modify progress there) and sat down to make a manual-ish solution.
First, I had to get my photos out of Flickr. For that I took
Yesterday I took a diversion from thinking about my upcoming cache project, largely because I took some pictures inside my house, and realized my offsite backup was getting full.
I have three levels of backups: