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
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Reply via email to