Can someone help me understand where I’m getting the logic wrong?
There was a survey. The survey said people identified themselves as part of groups. Ranking wise they said contribution areas, then program, then country, and then region.
Based on the survey the conclusion was drawn that “one of the largest gaps that currently exists in Mozilla’s ability to effectively support your work is a process through which groups can register to be officially recognised Mozilla”
And then a pilot was launched and 8/9 of them are region based groups. And no matter what the result of the pilot is, by end of 2019 there will be open registration for more groups.
Now, the last time I asked about how this is not going to fragment the community, I got a response
Is there already full clarity on how people are working? What is the clarity that we have?
I ask only because in a failed attempt at restructuring, there was an intentional attempt to reduce the importance of geographical groups so that there is more collaborations.
Now, it may have been wrong to discredit geographic groups like that.
But look at the things you are forced to build because of allowing so many groups:
You are essentially first creating 1000 groups and then trying to bring them together on a central platform.
What is the logic that makes this tick?