[001sky]

So, Mozilla is a three headed monster:

> Executive Chairwoman, Mozilla Foundation (Mitchell Baker)

> Executive Director, Mozilla Foundation (Mark Surman)

> CEO Mozilla Corporation (New position, 2008)

Mark Surman's employees using @mozilla handles were calling for the resignation of a competing CEO?

Am i reading this right? In other words this was under political air-cover.

The Mozilla Foundation now focuses solely on governance and policy issues...

The corporate governance here actually seems like a problem.

The new CEO and the New COO of @mozilla are going to look at this with ???

[dragonwriter]

The Mozilla Foundation owns Mozilla Corporation, and each organization has its own Board of Directors.

[001sky]

Yes, the Foundation CEO basically signed off on a PR stunt very damaging to Mozilla:

Mozilla Foundation Executive Director Mark Surman issued a statement to Ars in response to employees speaking out against Eich's hiring. "Our culture of openness extends to letting our staff and community be candid about their views on Mozilla’s direction," Surman wrote. "We're proud of that inclusiveness and how it distinguishes Mozilla from most organizations."

So, the split boards governance is a problem. Baker is the Chair and head of the project. She created the Corp CEO job and led the hiring process. She's the Chair of both Boards.

Its slightly awkward for a company to use its political activsm against itself in this way. It's even more awkward to manipulate the media to do it in public. Its even triply awkward that it was aknowleged publicly (usually indicates legal signed off on it).