code name for Thunderbird 3.2

Dan Mosedale dmose at mozilla.org
Sat Jun 19 00:11:29 UTC 2010


  On 6/18/10 4:20 PM, Kent James wrote:
>  On 6/18/2010 4:01 PM, Dan Mosedale wrote:
>> fundraising for the gulf
> I hate to be a killjoy here, but let's put this in perspective. The 20 
> billion dollars that BP has recently committed to this effort, if this 
> was used to fund a private foundation, would make it the fourth 
> largest private foundation in the world 
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wealthiest_charitable_foundations). 
> There is no way that any effort that Mozilla can put forward on this 
> can have any impact at all on the problem.
If I'm understanding you correctly, the objection you're raising is that 
because there are already significant amounts of money involved and the 
problem hasn't yet been solved, that the marginal value of additional 
amounts of money will have literally no impact on the problem.  Is that 
right?
> The only justification that I could see for investing effort there is 
> that it is trendy.
The word "trendy" has a bunch of negative connotations that I'm not 
convinced apply to this situation.  If I reframe that into the following 
question: "Is one of the justifications for investing effort here 
because a significant number of people are seeing the effects of the 
problem and have expressed a desire to help?", I would answer that 
question with a "yes".   Does that help?
>   Or is the point of this to raise money to sue BP for still more money?
I don't have a specific opinion about what the correct strategy for the 
Gulf is.  I do have an opinion that, as a technology organization, the 
most useful role for Mozilla is to partner with conservation 
organizations who are believed to have appropriate levels of values 
alignment, expertise, and efficacy and allow them to make those calls.
> There are many, many  worthy causes in the world. I would really hate 
> to see effort go toward "encouraging" people to donate their precious 
> money to this sinkhole, which will do virtually no good there compared 
> to the other places that you might put effort.
By using the phrase "this sinkhole", I suspect you're trying to 
communicate that it's not at all clear exactly what the right way 
forward in the Gulf is, nor is it clear exactly in what way specific 
donations are going to help.  Is that inference correct?

I think you also make a good point about comparative leverage here 
that's worth digging into further (though I won't do that digging just yet).

Dan



More information about the tb-planning mailing list