Mozilla Appoints Former Marketing Head Interim CEO 204
itwbennett (1594911) writes "Following the contentious and ultimately failed appointment of Brendan Eich as CEO last month, the Mozilla Corporation has appointed Chris Beard to the board of directors and made him interim CEO. Beard starting working as chief marketing officer for Mozilla in 2004, and oversaw the launch of its current browser, Firefox, in 2005. Beard also managed the launches of Firefox on Android and the Firefox OS for mobile phones."
See the official announcement. Quoting: "We began exploring the idea of Chris joining the Board of Directors some months ago. Chris has been a Mozillian longer than most. He’s been actively involved with Mozilla since before we shipped Firefox 1.0, he’s guided and directed many of our innovative projects, and his vision and sense of Mozilla is equal to anyone’s. I have relied on his judgement and advice for nearly a decade. This is an excellent time for Chris to bring his understanding of Mozilla to the Board."
Re:How do you know the company is dying? (Score:5, Informative)
Normally I might agree, but Firefox doesn't need to market in the same way that other companies do. Their income comes from very non-traditional sources, and their products are free. That's not to say I *like* the idea of marketing running the place, but I think it's better than it sounds. Mozilla's marketing has been about awareness, much more than about trying to sell something.
Re:It's not enough (Score:3, Informative)
I would rescue the above from Flamebait if I had points. It's on-topic for this thread (sort-of). Whether you agree with it or not, it fits here.
Re:It's not enough (Score:0, Informative)
I disagree, since Emanuel was speaking as mayor and giving tacit approval to the alderman's actions. That puts Emanuel on the "Irish need not apply" side. We can argue about whether such speech constitutes "working" or not. If speech isn't working, then I'm afraid mayors don't do very much work. :p
Rahm Emmanuel has taken precisely ZERO action against Chick-fil-A, as you falsely claimed. The fact is, there was one Chick-fil-A in Chicago when Emmanuel made that comment, now there are two (with more planned).
You asked what wasn't true in your post, and you got it. Now you're using a bullshit semantic argument to try deny your error. How sad.
(Wow, look at me lecturing the AC.)
You would do well not to lecture people who point out your errors - especially when you ask them to point out your errors.
Re:It's not enough (Score:3, Informative)
Wrong! Wholly fuck! Absolutely wrong!
Flamebait is not about "saying things to get people pissed off"! Flamebait is about intentionally trolling to insight a response.
Reading a damn dictionary is not that hard, so stop making up your own definitions for words. Further: I realize that people inventing their own definitions tend to be slow so I'll attempt to clarify. An opinion presented may piss you off by nature, because you have a different opinion. I.E. "There is a God" vs. "There is no God". If a person provides their opinion with intentionally inflammatory material, like "You are all burning in hell for not believing." or "Darwin dumbass!" (as is often done) that is trolling and possibly flamebait. A person simply expressing their opinion is not a troll or flame bait. These differences happen often with emotionally topics, such as politics and morality.
See the definition for Flamebait here [urbandictionary.com], and Troll here [wikipedia.org], and Flame here [google.com](2.).
When an opinion is well articulated and not written to be intentionally offensive, such as GP is, it's a different opinion not a Troll. If you don't like their opinion, present your counter points instead of whining and trying to censor by moderation. If you can't write well articulated retort to back your opinion, don't try do moderate people out of discussions. Improve your writing skills and opinion until you can retort.
Even if the opinion is not the "Popular" opinion the goal of moderation is to encourage dialogue, not censor opinions you don't like. If the post is on topic and generates responses (while not being a flame or troll) then the post should be moderated higher.
Re:Fantastic Google Chrome marketing (Score:5, Informative)
It's absolutely true. There were a bunch of blog posts by Mozilla employees supporting Brendan as CEO (even though many disagreed with his position on Prop 8), all completely ignored by the media. Looking at the relevant date range on http://planet.mozilla.org/ [mozilla.org] should find them...