There is certainly some irony in having a 200,000 INR per month salary+perks and encouraging others to contribute voluntarily (worse still to call it staggeringly low). More importantly I think, besides mere envy, that this causes a rift between much of the community that was actually happy being (unpaid) volunteers and those that would rather spend their time jostling to be part of the funded system. Overall it seems funds as opposed to shared resources (examples here being libraries, journal access) have a tendency to affect egalitarian aims, and I suspect the effects are worse in the "Global South". Vishnu or anyone else in such enviable positions might feel apologetic about it but the question to ask is whether it is even possible to find the right balance here.
Considering transparency as setting a bad precedent does not appear healthy either. One of the ideas that I keep pointing out as being a good compass for all projects that involve collaboration/participation is to understand that the term stands for a broad spectrum and it certainly would make sense to aim higher in the rungs of the "ladder of participation" if we are to have truly healthy collaboration. (See Arnstein's Ladder) http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/sherry-arnstein/ladder-of-citizen-participation.html best wishes Shyamal
_______________________________________________ Wikimediaindia-l mailing list Wikimediaindiafirstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l