On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 8:20 PM, pajz <pajzm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, we all know about the problems of giving monetary compensation to > editors. Just thinking aloud here, but I guess if you want to reward > editors in some way, but don't want to pay them directly, there's some > middle ground: Don't pay them, but let them donate their share of the cake. > > At the beginning of the year, the WMF would set a budget, add some buffer, > and all that is received on top of that goes to a charity pool which > "belongs" to the editors. However, they can't claim any of the money for > themselves, but instead can choose how much they'd like to give to charity > A, charity B, etc. So, for instance, I'm a fan of the work of UNICEF and a > lesser-known charity called Evidence Action. So "my" compensation for my > Wikipedia work would be an amount X that I prorate between these two > organizations. Other editors would also take part in this scheme.
And here I thought you were going to suggest giving each editor a pool of $$ to assign to their favorite skunkworks projects. If we divide the current WMF budget ($58M) by the current number of monthly active editors (71K), then take 60% off the top for keeping the lights on, infrastructure, etc. -- this is a fairly typical overhead percentage for grants at universities -- we're still left with $325/editor. Personally, I'd vote my funds for edit-a-thons in a box :) Phoebe, causing trouble p.s. this is a thought experiment. I think the logistics would be unwieldy. But not so unwieldy that the the highly-praised community tech punchlist couldn't be implemented in many other areas too. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>