Adding my 2c: his salary has nothing to do with "fairness" or an arbitrary upper limit on non-profit compensation, but a negotiation based on supply and demand.

Adding my 2c: his salary has nothing to do with "fairness" or an arbitrary upper limit on non-profit compensation, but a negotiation based on supply and demand. For the sake, of argument, let's take it as a given that 1) he could easily earn the same amount or more somewhere else, and 2) if offered $1 less than $800k, he would walk. The question then becomes whether the organization could replace his value for the same or less money. i.e. could they hire someone else for $800k, much less a more "appropriate" salary, who would run things as effectively? Maybe; I don't know enough to say. I might consider doing some research and putting more thought into the question before donating, but it doesn't seem out of the question for me that keeping on both the founder and someone with his level of experience would be worth that much or more.