Wikimedia boss scoops $100,000 payrise – after stepping down The former head of the charity that collects and dispenses cash from Wikipedia’s fundraising secured a pay rise worth almost 50 per cent – after she stepped down as chief executive. The details only emerged after the US-headquartered Wikimedia Foundation released its 990 tax form for 2014-15. Gardner joined the WMF in …
Not that I've ever donate, but next time that arrogant begging bowl comes up on the screen I'll be sorely tempted to send them an email to go stick it where the sun doesn't shine and tell them to go ask Gardner for some cash instead ! ;-)
The problem is, people are as bad as governments and markets when it comes to allocating money via charity.
Save the giant panda: Many monies!
Save the Titicaca scrotum frog: Ewwwwwwwwww!
Typically they'll give to charities which beg hardest, or outright lie that they're desperate for funds, even when they're awarding the CEO a massive bonus.
It wasn't that long ago that Wikipedia had that donation banner begging for money. Obviously they don't and never did need any money if they have that kind of money to waste on overpaid staff. Ideally they'd run lean and either bank the money for a rainy day (to the extent of the law governing nonprofits) and use the rest in a way that benefits their ideals.
Heck, Britannica has yearly revenue of about $35 million from what I understand, not counting its expenses which are probably similar in size. Wikipedia probably could have purchased them, and merged the content!
True.
I've never donated, but I use Wikipedia a lot so every time the find-raiser banner appears I do feel a pang of guilt. Sooner or later I expect I'd cave in and sent them some money.
But now I've seen this, and know how far they are from actually being skint, I won't be donating.
It really is the best source of information on many topics. Thanks to a vast army of volunteers that could never be paid properly.
It is based on goodwill and a positive outlook on human nature. That more people are mostly good than mostly bad. It is the antithesis of bureacratic thinking, and it works amazingly well.
Sure there are many issues. But on the whole it works.
And the money involved is infinitesimal compared to the good that it does.
It's OK if you want a vague overview of a topic. If you want actual details, Wikipedia is almost inevitably a bad choice.
Anyway, regardless of Wikipedia itself, the WMF is a pretty shady organization mostly designed to use Wikipedia as an excuse to make Jimmy Wales very, very rich.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
