[deleted]
Comment on weaponized nerdery
underisk@lemmy.ml 8 months agoi dont think anyone is ignoring that. the meme is talking about how it was built, not hot it’s currently maintained. it definitely didn’t start off spending that much, and all that money isn’t what made it popular
NotJustForMe@lemmy.ml 8 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.
Irelephant@lemm.ee 2 days ago
Aside from nagging a bit more often for donations, has the site gotten worse in any way as a result?
mriormro@lemmy.world 8 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.
underisk@lemmy.ml 8 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@lemmynsfw.com 8 months ago
What does that have to do with Wikipedia specifically?This isn’t a problem of wikipedia it’s a problem of capitalism
Gloomy@mander.xyz 8 months ago
I wanted to fact check you on this, and you speak true.
…m.wikimedia.org/…/Wikimedia_Foundation_salaries
Makes me question my willingness to donate money to them.
dariusj18@lemmy.world 8 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.
UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 8 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.
underisk@lemmy.ml 8 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. Nobody is gonna replace Jimmy unless he steps down willingly.