None of that addresses or explains why you posted an older article without noting the age of it.
And you do know how Mozilla Ventures is different from other parts of Mozilla, right?
I coalesce the vapors of human experience into a viable and meaningful comprehension.…
None of that addresses or explains why you posted an older article without noting the age of it.
And you do know how Mozilla Ventures is different from other parts of Mozilla, right?
You all not only don’t read the article, the date published is right there in the URL
Ah, that makes sense. Didn’t see it because it was a crosspost and my client (Voyager) left that out of the description.
The source for the bot’s info is Media Bias Fact Check, which is separate from Ground News. The admins added the Ground News link because users wanted additional sources and mentioned that one I believe.
I think the bigger question is why it bothered with Internet Archive, since that wasn’t mentioned in the original post, or did I miss something?
They take getting caught seriously, not the stuff they get caught at. Remember the government essentially has its finger in every pie so this kind of thing is not bad because it endangered people’s lives, it’s bad because it makes them look bad and might impact their exports.
Because when sharing anything, it’s important to provide the context of when it was published if it’s older? Especially when there are active and current discussions about a topic (ie governance of Mozilla) and someone could easily be confused about how recent an article is? Otherwise it could appear to be intentionally misleading, which I’m sure was not your intent.