Indeed, paying more salary is “one” way of making that possible. To me, it is more than a technical decision. Going for (in my opinion) such a high salary reflects a “choice” by the decision-makers to adopt this particular way of achieving the goals. Now, this is for me in complete contrast to how the wikipedia movement itself works. For a community that is NOT built on achieving competitiveness and quality by paying money, why should the foundation “choose” to take that route to achieve the goals. I am certainly not arguing that the volunteerism should guide such strategic policy initiatives. But, certainly the choices made in the way these policy initiatives are structured should not in reverse affect the “culture” of contribution in the community. If at all, it should inspire it more. And paying this kind of salaries is certainly not in line with the way the community has been evolving.
Regards, Prashanth Disclaimer: My thoughts, although immediately following Gautam John’s response is not a reaction to his mail, although I begin with responding to a part of his email. On 09-Nov-2013, at 6:56 pm, Gautam John <gau...@akshara.org.in> wrote: > On 9 November 2013 19:21, Hari Prasad Nadig <hpna...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Do you think it is appropriate to compare Wikimedia Foundation or its >> functioning in India to profit making companies and BPOs? > > Yes. The goals might be different but they both require qualified, > high quality people to make the goals happen. Paying a competitive > salary is one way to make that possible. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list > Wikimediaindiaemail@example.com > To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
_______________________________________________ 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