You must log in or register to comment.
Just ignore the 150M a year they spend managing finances, contributors, tech, moderation, etc. Takes a lot to maintain an accurate library.
i 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. all that spending is a consequence of it’s popularity, not the reason for it.
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.
I wanted to fact check you on this, and you speak true.
https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_salaries
Makes me question my willingness to donate money to them.
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.
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.
You think $750k for a CEO of a “simple” company is high?
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.
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.
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.
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?
And still, even with a do-over, somehow failed to call it “M’akshually”. 🤷🏼♂️
At least that is the PR.
It all goes out of the window as soon as politcal events are concerned, then it is just western naratives all over. With things as sources, good sources, multiple viewpoints all forgotten. What the west says is treated as gospel. While paid editors up to and including state actors rule the site. The system of nerds correcting each other is then used to prevent corrections.
That’s what it should’ve been. In reality anything even remotely political on it is heavily biased towards imperial core and NATO countries, and against their geopolitical rivals.
This happens because most of these “nerds” are also westerners and rate their own outlets as more reliable, thus enforcing western propaganda.
Sur-fucking-prise.
Least braindead .world user
Wawa NATO
Russian imperialism is the best recruiter NATO ever had.
Well uh, username checks out ig
I don’t feel the need to correct anyone, EXCEPT when it comes to myths about date rape drugs. Most people still believe that roofies are the Rolls Royces of seduction, when in reality, chloroform remains The Gold Standard. Ever since our society began shunning manual labor back in The 1960s, shoving a chemical-soaked rag over the mouth and nose over the girl you fancy fell out of favor, despite the fact this remains the most effective way of charming her pants and underroos off
I donated to wikipedia. Then I found out their scummy biases towards anything outside the anglosphere. Now I want my money back.
Okay, this is going to need elaboration.
What I find amazing is that some people are so dedicated to Wikipedia that they literally and consider vandals for how much information they put in.
