• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    710 months ago

    Some would say that most of the spending is based on greed. Individual salaries doubled to tripled in the last decade, with their head earning three quarters of a million now.

    It was a tenth 15 years ago.

    They started out right, like they all do. Then personal money catches up.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      810 months ago

      You thinking a $750,000 salary for the CEO of one of the top ten visited websites in the world and arguably one of the most important knowledge resources we’ve probably ever created is ‘greed’ is pretty hilarious.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        610 months ago

        Thinking one guy deserves that much salary for the work of millions of volunteers over decades is what’s hilarious. Do you think those giant pleas that they post when they need money would be as convincing if they listed his salary?

        • @dr_lobotomy
          link
          English
          410 months ago

          What does that have to do with Wikipedia specifically?This isn’t a problem of wikipedia it’s a problem of capitalism

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1110 months ago

        I think you should consider the opportunity cost of what they would be making elsewhere. Salaries need to be competitive, otherwise you are at the mercy of those who are willing to work for less and hope that the reason is benevolent.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          310 months ago

          I don’t buy that argument at all, it just doesn’t make any sense for a position like Wikipedia. Sure, if you’re in a highly competitive and specialised industry where connections and insider information matters I would get it, but just running a “simple” organisation like Wikipedia, no way.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              610 months ago

              Yes? And by simple I meant in the manner that it’s not a competitive company. They aren’t there to bring in the AI revolution or invent the next iPhone. Their primary goal is to just keep the servers running, not create record profits for shareholders.

              High six figure salaries in general seems foreign to me. A core part of the nordic model is to limit wage gap between high education jobs and low education jobs, so the entire CEO wage structure in the US seems completely backwards.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                210 months ago

                It may seem foreign, but it is the state of things. $750k/yr for a $100mil non-profit CEO is about average.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          That would make more sense if Wikipedia was a profit generating enterprise that needed to satisfy shareholders. It’s run like a charity through donations, though.

          Fifteen other people sit on the board of trustees that oversees wikimedia. The only person on that board who gets paid is Jimmy.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 month ago

      Aside from nagging a bit more often for donations, has the site gotten worse in any way as a result?