10 ms·
Sure but pointing out $350k executive salaries as somehow lavish is strange. That seems low for an executive at one of the most important (or at least, most vie
by yupper32 4y ago
Sure but pointing out $350k executive salaries as somehow lavish is strange. That seems low for an executive at one of the most important (or at least, most viewed) websites on the planet.
- mysterydip 4y agoWhat do they do, though?
- coding123 4y agothat's a lot of salary for something that is going broke and needs donations now.
- mcguire 4y agoIs requesting donations better or worse than selling advertising?
- cool_dude85 4y agoBetter. The real question is, is this way of soliciting donations better than another way of soliciting donations? Answer to that is not clear.
- matheusmoreira 4y agoHow about they start spending their money wisely instead of growing infinitely? That way they can keep Wikipedia up and running for the next decade or so without bothering us with these solicitations.
- jjulius 4y ago>Sure but pointing out $350k executive salaries as somehow lavish is strange. It's not, really. It's about how you frame things, and the follow-up tweets touch on that: >You wouldn't think so from the fundraising emails currently being sent out, telling people to donate "to keep Wikipedia online", saying it's "awkward to ask", etc. A recent poll of Wikipedia volunteers condemned these emails as unethical and misleading >If people want to throw money into a bottomless pit, fine; but let's not pretend that the money is needed "to keep Wikipedia online". >And that story is not the story told to prospective donors. Wikipedia and its unpaid volunteers – the people who actually write and curate Wikipedia – deserve better.
- yupper32 4y agoI'm not disagreeing with the overall premise of the tweet chain. I'm just saying that $350k is pretty cheap for an exec at one of the most viewed/important websites on the planet.
- akolbe 4y agoI guess you have to compare it to the salary of the donors who feel compelled by these heart-wrenching fundraising messages to donate. Here is a senior with $18 to his name promising to donate as soon as his social security check arrives: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising/Archive_6#Shame_on_you_WMF%21_Shame%21 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising/Archive_6#S... The Wikimedia Foundation has also just been fundraising in India and South Africa, again asking people there to donate so Wikipedia stays online for them, ad-free, subscription-free and independent. None of these executives have anything do with the Wikipedia content. All of that is written by unpaid volunteers in their spare time. When Wikipedia first became a top-10 website, the Wikimedia Foundation had less than a dozen staff, and annual expenses of $2 million. I am not saying lets go back to that; I'm only saying this to make the point that the success of Wikipedia was not dependent on highly paid executives. It happened when there weren't any. The main value of the site comes from the volunteers.
- bawolff 4y agoBeing envious of something doesn't make it cheaper. Most in-demand, skilled labour is much more pricey than what the average person makes.
- fluoridation 4y agoYou're answering a point no one made. It has nothing to do with "being envious". Imagine you were asked to donate to "keep the animal shelter open", and went you went there you found that they were using gold water dishes for the little critters. You would be within your right to complain. You thought you were donating to keep it operating, but now you find that they're using funds on frivolous expenses. Is there something a dish made out of gold does that one made out of plastic doesn't, to justify the expense? Is there something a $350k executive does that a minimum wage one (or even none at all) doesn't? Any organization that asks for donations would be subject to criticism if it doesn't optimize its operations as much as possible.
- bawolff 4y ago
- JohnFen 4y ago$350k salaries _are_ lavish, though. It seems strange to me that people would argue otherwise.
- karmakurtisaani 4y agoI suppose they meant relatively speaking. Taking into account how massive of a project Wikipedia is and hence how much responsibility the position has.
- JohnFen 4y agoI don't understand this. Do you think that an executive's responsibilities scale with the size of the enterprise? I don't think that's true. In fact, I would argue that an executive at a small operation has more responsibility than one at a large operation.
- random314 4y agoNot in SF. Maybe there is a case to be made to move Wikipedia operations outside Bay area.
- akolbe 4y agoMaybe there is a case for moving much of it outside the US? Lots of staffers work remotely anyway.
- random314 4y agoYes. OTOH, United states has one of the best free speech protections in the world. It would make sense, to have the key people and data centers in the US. EU, however, has better privacy protection initiatives.
- akolbe 4y agoAgreed, but staffers can be abroad (there are a few even now).
- ryan_lane 4y agoIt's lower than total comp of senior engineers in the bay area, just to give a point of reference.
- karencarits 4y agoIt's about twice the salary of the Nordic prime ministers (not combined though) as another point of reference
- triceratops 4y agoIs the PM's salary before- or after-tax? Do they get free housing as the prime minister? How's the housing market in their cities? In SF, where Wikipedia is based, it's completely whack. What else does a PM get? Household staff, personal assistants, drivers etc?
- ryan_lane 4y agoThe executives don't live in Norway, they live in the bay area; hence my (relevant) particular point of reference.
- parkingrift 4y agoIt's pretty lavish for a nonprofit.
- oh-4-fucks-sake 4y ago100% agreed. $350k salaries for people that have basically built and maintained the modern-day Library of Alexandria is a pittance. These people deserve it.
- akolbe 4y agoMost of them are recent hires. They have built nothing. Wikipedia was built by volunteers.
- spookierookie 4y agoI wonder how much the contributors are being paid...
- omnimus 4y agoIts SF salaries. Why are these nonprofits based in SF anyway? Same goes for Mozilla. Seems like anywhere else it would be pretty insane money for nonprofits.