code name for Thunderbird 3.2
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
> 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
> 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).
More information about the tb-planning