An interesting comment appeared on the Foundation-l list:



Now, assuming you could either work from your home, or an office space near your home, or move to San Francisco (if you wished)... How many of you would work for WMF if your current salary were tripled?

I don't think I'd be doing my family right, were I not to take an offer like that. I could retire in 8 years, instead of 24. Jimbo would probably visibly cringe every time he saw me in the office, and that would be an invaluable perk, eh?

Greg

We can only keep hoping they'll open the "Wikipedia Review Attaché" position

If I'm understanding Birgitte correctly, the amount of stress and public scrutiny just isn't worth the aggravation by working for the WMF.

To quote the immortal David Letterman: "I wouldn't give his troubles to a monkey on a rock."

I dunno, I'd probably have to sign a non-disparagement agreement. Then again, for triple my salary, I could probably afford a lawyer capable of getting me out of the non-disparagement agreement.

I'd probably do it, working from home, but I'd probably wind up quitting or getting fired pretty soon after getting hired, when I refused to sign some document or something.

David Shankbone alluded to that when I suggested that the WMF seemed to cope OK without the anonymity.

I would think that anyone involved in a public facing company is going to come under public scrutiny. I suspect that being in charge of Wikipedia is on the same level as say running Second Life or Half Life or whatever those new fangled online game thingies are called. Seems like running OverStock suffers the same issue.

I can quite understand: going into a company that has such a high public profile, the main "customers" are a bunch of kids who don't have a clue and have starry eyed ideals about how everything should be magically perfect, and also realising that you have joined a bench of amateurs who haven't a clue and are making it up as they go along.

I wouldn't do it. I've dropped out of working for that sort of company, one's that don't see how proper accounting is relevant because they have more important things to do and then want you to dig through 2 years worth of computer records to find out whether they are rich or bankrupt (and they are so stressed out they don't actually care which any more!).

Since my salary is zero, the prospect of tripling it doesn't really get me too excited.

How does this advance the criticism of Wikipedia? Why not comment on this, which certainly brings up quite a few more direct issues regarding WMF staff....

All in good time. I am a slow reader who occasionally requires time to digest and reflect on new information before rendering a thoughtful opinion on it.

! Well I presumed the question meant "income" in general. You're right I would get zero too, but if it was tripling my welfare benefits including housing costs (I'm on benefits so the cost of renting my flat is included) it would be ok but not worth it if it involved too much work. I wouldn't mind having Jimbo's mysterious income, he seems to have the monies to enjoy himself lol, without any clear-cut job description

Just as a thought experiment, mind you... I would. Probably even if it was just doubled. But not for a 50% increase, I live in a very cheap cost of living area and I like my toys... that would be a cut in my family's standard of living, so no.