Post 9y7pS1dcPPSKOMobEu by hellcp@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by hellcp@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #9y7bvvMctwx8GLEJcW by qrsbrwn@totallylegit.site
2020-08-14T18:46:35.544094Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
We're babysitting a neighbors kid and after learning a bit about one of his parents something came to mind.I'm gonna start calling parents who pretend to want the best for you but whose actions shows that they obviously don't care "Mozilla parents".
(DIR) Post #9y7lOzre9CowCng2HQ by hellcp@mastodon.social
2020-08-14T20:17:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@qrsbrwn it's really hard to actually deal with the fact that the management of a company that is a force of good despite the management (and because of the passionate workers) is so bad it drives the entire company into the ground
(DIR) Post #9y7lP1jDDXGJzDkKPY by qrsbrwn@totallylegit.site
2020-08-14T20:32:39.891286Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hellcp Mozilla has many great employees no one is saying otherwise. The setup with the company and the foundation and all the shenanigans was suspect from the getgo. Over the years their actions has said all that needs saying.
(DIR) Post #9y7n0Lz4y8vjTgWx5U by hellcp@mastodon.social
2020-08-14T20:39:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@qrsbrwn well, the reason they had to set up mozcorp was google donation they got, and their inability to use it up in short enough time so irs didn't dissolve them. this is how foundations work around the world, it would be nice to fix that system, but I don't think that's where we start
(DIR) Post #9y7n0MW2zZIl7vxHTU by qrsbrwn@totallylegit.site
2020-08-14T20:50:38.553646Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hellcp that problem has way better solutions.If the problem is that you want to be able to mask who is really funding you and make it less visible where you spend them then starting a subsidiary like that is an excellent solution.
(DIR) Post #9y7pS1dcPPSKOMobEu by hellcp@mastodon.social
2020-08-14T21:01:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@qrsbrwn that's fair, again, this was the only way for mozilla foundation to not be dissolved by irs, because the us tax law sucks balls
(DIR) Post #9y7pS2RbPZREtOCW9I by qrsbrwn@totallylegit.site
2020-08-14T21:18:03.358948Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hellcp except it wasn't the only way. They could have solved the same issue in a myriad of ways.The way they CHOSE did indeed solve the "non-profit" issue but only in a rather convoluted way that also gave opportunity for corruption and subterfuge.If they really wanted to use the money over time they could have started a foundation that held on to the money and funded FOSS projects.That can be done anywhere in the world (well ok not anywhere but in most of the world) and as far as the IRS cares that money is spent.
(DIR) Post #9y8dDai8io9iX7EyZs by hellcp@mastodon.social
2020-08-14T23:16:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@qrsbrwn the issue is that foundations cannot hold onto money for more than 3 years, so that's not a solution
(DIR) Post #9y8dDba1UTG1EES0Z6 by qrsbrwn@totallylegit.site
2020-08-15T06:35:41.561743Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hellcp that kind of foundation can't hold on to money for more than 3 years. Other types can.The choice of getting a corporation wasn't to benefit you or me. It wasn't done in rush either, the corporation was founded in 2005 and Google started drowning it in money 2006. There was plenty of time to choose a different more transparent solution if they had wanted to. They didn't though.
(DIR) Post #9y8ddTMKg5NJGGNiuu by hellcp@mastodon.social
2020-08-14T23:17:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@qrsbrwn but a corporation under foundation can, which is why a setup like mozilla is so common all around the world (ikea is a good example in switzerland (it's not in sweden for some reason (I wonder why)))
(DIR) Post #9y8ddUpnC2XBpvAlTU by qrsbrwn@totallylegit.site
2020-08-15T06:40:22.832943Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hellcp the reason IKEA has a foundation owning a corporation and is based in Sweden is because Ingvar Kamprad didn't want to pay taxes.That's why this setup is popular. You can do whatever you want in the corporation without having to have things like open books. Then you ensure that instead of making a profit you transfer money to the foundation via some method like using a logo or trademark that the foundation owns. That way you can avoid taxing your profits.It's always done to benefit the few at the expense of the many.
(DIR) Post #9y8nVTMHnOzyU4BSnA by hellcp@mastodon.social
2020-08-15T08:25:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@qrsbrwn going through the legal stuff, I don't see such exceptions, this seems to apply to every type of foundation and non-profit https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/public-disclosure-and-availability-of-exempt-organizations-returns-and-applications-documents-subject-to-public-disclosure
(DIR) Post #9y8nVTnw8b7Hrp7XtI by qrsbrwn@totallylegit.site
2020-08-15T08:30:58.837766Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hellcp that's only regarding non-profits in the US.There are other countries you know ;).You could also have used a corporation but with commitment to having open books and setting rules about how to spend money.
(DIR) Post #9y8ocnU1TEz2sgrKYy by hellcp@mastodon.social
2020-08-15T08:36:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@qrsbrwn I am fully aware of both, I'm just pointing out that the structure they had set up wasn't that unreasonable, it only grew into a monster because somebody forgot corporations are inherently evil ;)
(DIR) Post #9y8oco3TLRL8edRdom by qrsbrwn@totallylegit.site
2020-08-15T08:43:30.543438Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hellcp and what I am saying is that the setup was unreasonable from day one. It was either meant to become this monstrosity by design or those who created the setup did so without being able to forsee that it would without exception become the monstrosity it is.So evil or incompetence. Pick at least one.