On Our Abusive Relationship with Mozilla’s Firefox

Re:On Our Abusive Relationship with Mozilla’s Firefox by leetcrew on Friday October 23, 2020 @12:42PM (#24871327)

> The reality is that the leader of a not for profit organization competes in the same job market as those for for profit organizations. So if you want someone decent to do a good job then you need to pay them the market price.

I'm not sure how true this is. people that work at non-profits often don't view jobs at for-profits as acceptable substitutes unless they really need the money. the belief that they are making the world a better place (or at least the image of doing so) is part of the compensation package. the real bidding war is among other non-profits.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On Our Abusive Relationship with Mozilla’s Firefox by elcritch on Friday October 23, 2020 @05:21PM (#24874324)

A good example of what your saying is Jimmy Whales. He claims to have taken no salary from Wikimedia [1], despite running one of the top internet sites by traffic. Wikipedia makes a fair chunk in donations, but none of their execs make more than about $200k or $300k, IIRC.

If anything, a top exec making $2 million at a tech non-profit might be actively attracting the wrong leadership to run Mozilla. Same with the other top execs. If Firefox share was increasing, perhaps you'd have a case otherwise. I kinda hope someone creates a viable Firefox fork and backing org, with better stewardship as I've long been a Firefox fan.

1: https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/1118168799876976640?l...

[ Parent | on HN ]