> Surely such impressive pay is justified by the equally impressive results Mozilla has achieved? No, it is completely discretionary. I don't consider this con

> Surely such impressive pay is justified by the equally impressive results Mozilla has achieved? No, it is completely discretionary. I don't consider this controversial because I know it is completely discretionary. Why would it be tied to anything aside from the ability to continue paying that compensation or desire to be compensated that way? The only consideration of a foundation is the nearly tax-free capital growth rate, 5% net assets grant rate, and whether the TAXED salaries are tolerable. And for them, yes, paying super high income taxes and giving the government over a million on a $2.4m salary per year is tolerable.