181–190 of 417 posts
Why are they actually getting any severance at all? It looks like they resigned to take new jobs. They weren't sacked or made redundant.
Executive compensation packages work differently and tend to be much more bonus driven. Frequently these types of severance packages are to make up some sort of assumed bonus and ensure no compensation based contract disputes later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're giving a business definition of a few responsibilities for an executive and then saying it's a poor fit. Now try giving an NGO definition of an executive to see if it's a better fit and if they have any significant responsibilities. Non-profits shut down all the time. If you're concerned about a lasting impact you'll pay for a talented executive team.
Under what circumstances would Wikipedia shit down, if it still has money for operational expenses? The biggest set of responsibilities charites I didn't list is sales (aka donations). But Wikipedia doesn't do more good work (as donors think of it) the more money they get. It doesn't scale up much that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I call anyone who agrees with my politics, or keeps quiet about theirs politically neutral.
A wise man once said, "You're either with us, or you're with the enemy" I think that sums up US politics pretty well since 2016
'Every nation has to either be with us, or against us. Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price.' Hillary Clinton 2001-09-13
Just take a look at this graph. The salaries have been bloating whilst hosting expenses are flat and plummeting as a proportion of all expenses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation#/media/Fi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation#/media/Fi... Net assets are sitting at ~$240M about 10x what they were a decade ago. Yet they roll out a sob-story banner on every page insinuating that they mi…
> I hope they're politically neutral. Wikipedia is definitely not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>politically neutral What does politically neutral mean?
I call anyone who agrees with my politics, or keeps quiet about theirs politically neutral.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly don't care if Wikimedia has several billion stashed away like all the Ivy Leagues do. They are doing God's work, mostly thankless work, and they have managed to do it well in an Internet mostly comprised of dross. How they have managed to keep the quality up and keep it as neutral as they have is beyond me. I've run user-generated content sites and keeping on top of the moderation will make you Google self…
They aren’t though. The amount of money they are spending on the core product you are thinking of is actually declining. All this extra raised cash is going to other purposes.
I'm still happy to let them do it simply because of the love I have for all their work on Wikipedia. They can spend my money on crazy if they want, as long as it makes the right people happy.
The fact that the (essentially) negative article about severance payments exists on Wikipedia itself is at least a good sign that they're not trying to hide what other nonprofits would gladly want to sweep under the rug.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Asking tangentially, earnestly, and with a genuine lack of knowledge: are $404k and $311k the market rate for the base compensation of a CEO and COO of a non-profit at Wikimedia's scale? EDIT: Found at least one source on US non-profits that excludes healthcare and university roles which skew numbers: https://analytics.excellenceingiving.com/2021-2022-nonprofit... Suggesting $364k compensation for the CEO a nonprofit…
In my experience reading hundreds of IRS 990 forms these number are not out of bounds for non-profits at their scale. Healthcare and university may skew the absolute numbers, but are similar. Specifically a great executive will personally move the fundraising needle in organizations (+1-5% or more) and mediocre executive can cause losses/missed opportunities in the opposite direction of a similar magnitude. The conve…
I could probably COO on the non-fundraising side, but I'd be an absolute fundraising failure. Non-profit C level execs are fundraisers.
Man, I've been fired by for-profit companies and felt lucky to get four weeks severance. It's upsetting that people working for a non-profit are getting 1.5x their salary, but I guess this is kind of what we get for believing that a non-profit is going to act better than an evil corporation.
While I think Wikipedia is highly suspect given its ample reserves and continued begging, it should not be upsetting for you. It should bring you joy that someone got treated well.
It highlights that it's not the standard. I don't feel particular joy that a person who is already treated well continues to be treated well. I feel joy when a person who isn't already treated well is treated well. Joy is not my default state; I don't feel it about status quo human situations.
This is what our donations are paying for? I'll be thinking twice before donating again.
Just take a look at this graph. The salaries have been bloating whilst hosting expenses are flat and plummeting as a proportion of all expenses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation#/media/Fi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation#/media/Fi... Net assets are sitting at ~$240M about 10x what they were a decade ago. Yet they roll out a sob-story banner on every page insinuating that they mi…
2016 Wikimedia Foundation Budget: $69,136,758 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Budget: $145,970,915 I love Wikipedia but I don't see how this cost explosion can evenly be remotely justified. What value have they added in that time? A new editor and CSS on articles?