General Discussion • Re: Pale Moon's PR Problem

I think European-Based would be a better alternative than European developed/development leadership.

Interesting idea.

But yeah, hearing this, it sounds like Europeans are actually the most worried about the idea of the EU's interest being prioritized over their own national identities... apparently Britain wasn't alone in that discomfort?

Well, thinking about this, it seems like possibly the most neutral way of doing this I could think of would be to have whatever the European equivalent of an LLC is established for Moonchild Productions (I think it's an AB but not sure), and then say something like "Pale Moon is developed by Moonchild Productions AB, a Swedish limited-liability company which does not fall under US jurisdiction." I think corporate language referring to where something is incorporated sounds better to people than having to fall back on a person's citizenship or allegiance because that can evoke ideas of political alignment subconsciously.

For instance, if I had the resources to incorporate, I would much rather advertise Epyrus as "developed by Epyrus Limited, a Delaware LLC," if given the chance, rather than "American development leadership" or "developed by an American," because the first one lets people know who whose jurisdiction I'm under and that my goal is to make everyone's liability clear, without evoking images of the US flag, Silicon Valley, bald eagles, or the military. The problem being, of course, that MC and I may not have the resources to do that so easily. But if we could, it might help with perception.

I think this wound up being tough because usually by the time a project gets as big as Pale Moon is, an LLC or equivalent has been established. Trying to refer to your own citizenship and location as an individual and implying it's meaningful without sounding political is something that is surprisingly hard to do...