▲ 987 ▼ Good luck figuring it out since it also doesn’t come with man pages (lemmy.world) submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by cannedtuna@lemmy.world to c/memes@sopuli.xyz 184 comments fedilink hide all child comments Edit: As @bdonvr@thelemmy.club points out below This is just a mascot and is not a new logo The blog referencing Mozilla’s statement on the mascots gender says, (he/she/they/them/it), use whatever pronoun you prefer.
[–] wrinkle2409@lemmy.cafe 24 points 4 months ago* (3 children) True, it was just "a fox" for me so far. I didn't really care about the gender of a drawing. I guess it is a good awareness move though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] errer@lemmy.world 49 points 4 months ago (2 children) Feels like a publicity stunt more than a genuine attempt to include non-binary people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 22 points 4 months ago (2 children) It isn't, though. They never said that the mascot was non-binary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] daggermoon@piefed.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) Awww bummer. I was excited for the NB fox. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WillFord27@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) The fox is schrodinger's gender so... they/them until proven guilty? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 4 months ago that’s exactly it: in context, kit is a feature intended to be interpreted by the user; not a representation of a sentient character having made a conscious choice to be non-binary simply because of mozilla’s chosen pronouns and lack of gender expression permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 4 months ago* they do though via stating its pronouns - even including it, repeatedly referring to it even in their intro blog post as “they” but that’s because it’s a feature to increase the feeling friendliness of the browser by establishing personal connection via the application of any (or non-) gender by the user no matter their preference rather than intended as a portrayal of a sentient character having made a decision for themselves permalink fedilink source parent [–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 1 point 4 months ago Exactly this. It feels like some kind of nonsense spam or troll. If I was to take the bait, I might say it was to cover for their CEO making some anti gay marriage political contribution. But that was like 15 years ago, I don’t even know if he’s still CEO or if anyone even remembers. permalink fedilink source parent [–] realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip 11 points 4 months ago (2 children) To me, this feels more like a PR move than an awareness move. Kind of like: "We don't wanna do anything substantial so uuuuh let's just make our logo non-binary". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago It's a terrible PR move if you don't say anything about it. They didn't say "Hey, look! Our mascot is non-binary!" All they did was use they/them pronouns. permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 4 months ago* but it’s not a PR move… their blog post lays out the reasoning: kit is intended to exist in the browser to make users feel good about using the browser. it’s a friendly “congratulations for interacting” and “we’re doing something for your benefit” (as an anthropomorphic representation of that behaviour) character, and a feature of it as an engineered feature is that the user can apply any gender they like. kit hasn’t made a choice to be non-binary; mozilla has made a choice to make kit specifically ambiguous both in aesthetic when drawn and pronouns when written about permalink fedilink source parent [–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago It's a s***** awareness move. It's just a marketing ploy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] errer@lemmy.world 49 points 4 months ago (2 children) Feels like a publicity stunt more than a genuine attempt to include non-binary people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 22 points 4 months ago (2 children) It isn't, though. They never said that the mascot was non-binary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] daggermoon@piefed.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) Awww bummer. I was excited for the NB fox. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WillFord27@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) The fox is schrodinger's gender so... they/them until proven guilty? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 4 months ago that’s exactly it: in context, kit is a feature intended to be interpreted by the user; not a representation of a sentient character having made a conscious choice to be non-binary simply because of mozilla’s chosen pronouns and lack of gender expression permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 4 months ago* they do though via stating its pronouns - even including it, repeatedly referring to it even in their intro blog post as “they” but that’s because it’s a feature to increase the feeling friendliness of the browser by establishing personal connection via the application of any (or non-) gender by the user no matter their preference rather than intended as a portrayal of a sentient character having made a decision for themselves permalink fedilink source parent [–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 1 point 4 months ago Exactly this. It feels like some kind of nonsense spam or troll. If I was to take the bait, I might say it was to cover for their CEO making some anti gay marriage political contribution. But that was like 15 years ago, I don’t even know if he’s still CEO or if anyone even remembers. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 22 points 4 months ago (2 children) It isn't, though. They never said that the mascot was non-binary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] daggermoon@piefed.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) Awww bummer. I was excited for the NB fox. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WillFord27@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) The fox is schrodinger's gender so... they/them until proven guilty? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 4 months ago that’s exactly it: in context, kit is a feature intended to be interpreted by the user; not a representation of a sentient character having made a conscious choice to be non-binary simply because of mozilla’s chosen pronouns and lack of gender expression permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 4 months ago* they do though via stating its pronouns - even including it, repeatedly referring to it even in their intro blog post as “they” but that’s because it’s a feature to increase the feeling friendliness of the browser by establishing personal connection via the application of any (or non-) gender by the user no matter their preference rather than intended as a portrayal of a sentient character having made a decision for themselves permalink fedilink source parent
[–] daggermoon@piefed.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 child) Awww bummer. I was excited for the NB fox. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WillFord27@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) The fox is schrodinger's gender so... they/them until proven guilty? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 4 months ago that’s exactly it: in context, kit is a feature intended to be interpreted by the user; not a representation of a sentient character having made a conscious choice to be non-binary simply because of mozilla’s chosen pronouns and lack of gender expression permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WillFord27@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) The fox is schrodinger's gender so... they/them until proven guilty? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 4 months ago that’s exactly it: in context, kit is a feature intended to be interpreted by the user; not a representation of a sentient character having made a conscious choice to be non-binary simply because of mozilla’s chosen pronouns and lack of gender expression permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 4 months ago that’s exactly it: in context, kit is a feature intended to be interpreted by the user; not a representation of a sentient character having made a conscious choice to be non-binary simply because of mozilla’s chosen pronouns and lack of gender expression permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 4 months ago* they do though via stating its pronouns - even including it, repeatedly referring to it even in their intro blog post as “they” but that’s because it’s a feature to increase the feeling friendliness of the browser by establishing personal connection via the application of any (or non-) gender by the user no matter their preference rather than intended as a portrayal of a sentient character having made a decision for themselves permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 1 point 4 months ago Exactly this. It feels like some kind of nonsense spam or troll. If I was to take the bait, I might say it was to cover for their CEO making some anti gay marriage political contribution. But that was like 15 years ago, I don’t even know if he’s still CEO or if anyone even remembers. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip 11 points 4 months ago (2 children) To me, this feels more like a PR move than an awareness move. Kind of like: "We don't wanna do anything substantial so uuuuh let's just make our logo non-binary". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago It's a terrible PR move if you don't say anything about it. They didn't say "Hey, look! Our mascot is non-binary!" All they did was use they/them pronouns. permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 4 months ago* but it’s not a PR move… their blog post lays out the reasoning: kit is intended to exist in the browser to make users feel good about using the browser. it’s a friendly “congratulations for interacting” and “we’re doing something for your benefit” (as an anthropomorphic representation of that behaviour) character, and a feature of it as an engineered feature is that the user can apply any gender they like. kit hasn’t made a choice to be non-binary; mozilla has made a choice to make kit specifically ambiguous both in aesthetic when drawn and pronouns when written about permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago It's a terrible PR move if you don't say anything about it. They didn't say "Hey, look! Our mascot is non-binary!" All they did was use they/them pronouns. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 4 months ago* but it’s not a PR move… their blog post lays out the reasoning: kit is intended to exist in the browser to make users feel good about using the browser. it’s a friendly “congratulations for interacting” and “we’re doing something for your benefit” (as an anthropomorphic representation of that behaviour) character, and a feature of it as an engineered feature is that the user can apply any gender they like. kit hasn’t made a choice to be non-binary; mozilla has made a choice to make kit specifically ambiguous both in aesthetic when drawn and pronouns when written about permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago It's a s***** awareness move. It's just a marketing ploy. permalink fedilink source parent
