> [Mozilla always jumped on fads], everyone does.

If you read down in the thread, there's a good discussion about how this simply isn't true about Mozilla.

Of the fads Christophe Henry mentioned top of thread, Mozilla flat out didn't invest any resources in some of them, invested minimal resources in others (accepting donations in crypto), and modest resources in VR (which you'd expect given the browser-VR integration standards forming).

So the feeling about Mozilla being tech-ADHD comes more from folks reading their social media posts than the people who work there or watch the codebase.

> If you read down in the thread, there's a good discussion about how this simply isn't true about Mozilla.

Yeah, I'm not searching 500 posts for this..

> Of the fads Christophe Henry mentioned top of thread

Who is Christophe Henry? Is this some namecalling?

> Mozilla flat out didn't invest any resources in some of them,

That doesn't make it better, being somewhat selective is also normal. Most companies don't have the resources to follow literally every fad.

> So the feeling about Mozilla being tech-ADHD comes more from folks reading their social media posts than the people who work there or watch the codebase.

That's the point. Communication of Mozilla is so awful, their whole public picture is how wasteful they are with money, throwing it at pointless dead on arrival-projects. Here are two lists with them [1], [2], this is not a small number of failed projects. They are not even including the small changes in the browser itself.

[1] https://www.spacebar.news/the-mozilla-graveyard/ [2] https://killedbymozilla.com/