[trgv]

It seems that some people view the term "meritocracy" negatively because they believe it implies that everyone has the same opportunities. I don't see that implication, but if enough other people do, maybe it's worth re-wording their governance docs.

At the same time, the proposed replacement seems off the target:

> "Mozilla is an open source project. Our community is structured as a virtual organization. Authority is primarily distributed to both volunteer and employed community members as they show their ability through contributions to the project. The project also seeks to debias this system of distributing authority through active interventions that engage and encourage participation from diverse communities."

What's wrong with something innocuous, like: "We strive to encourage contributions/engagement/participation from diverse communities"?

[cucumberferity]

> The project also seeks to debias this system of distributing authority

Because this is not about the governance documents of an open source software project, it is about affirming the radical worldview of a small but loud fringe group in the name of diversity.

Except the only diversity is creates is diversity for people with the correct political opinions. It has nothing to do with the actual diversity that benefits an open source project.

It is time we stop listening to this fringe group about how to achieve diversity, they clearly only want power and control for themselves.

We should not let them bully pragmatic moderates who generally support diversity and inclusion into ceding them more authority and dictatorial control.

[pseudalopex]

I think their proposed language could use some work, but a key difference from yours is the commitment to "active interventions". It's easy for an organization to pay lip service to something in a mission statement and go on to neglect or unintentionally discourage it.