[Wikimedia-l] compromise?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
46 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] compromise?

James Salsman-2
How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
competitive with area tech firms, whether Fellowships should be
jettisoned, how much personell to put into the Education Program and
engineering, and how much of a reserve to invest, preferably with low
risk instruments which pay above the rate of inflation?

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Thomas Dalton
I'm not quite sure what you mean by multivariate analysis... You only seem
to be talking about one variable - the message.
On Dec 28, 2012 9:46 PM, "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
> competitive with area tech firms, whether Fellowships should be
> jettisoned, how much personell to put into the Education Program and
> engineering, and how much of a reserve to invest, preferably with low
> risk instruments which pay above the rate of inflation?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Richard Symonds-3
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
That would be complex, and could be a disaster... I'd appreciate some input
from folks like Tango.
On Dec 28, 2012 9:46 PM, "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
> competitive with area tech firms, whether Fellowships should be
> jettisoned, how much personell to put into the Education Program and
> engineering, and how much of a reserve to invest, preferably with low
> risk instruments which pay above the rate of inflation?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

James Salsman-2
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
> I'm not quite sure what you mean by multivariate analysis

I mean as in the tests done May 16, September 20, and October 9
reported at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2012/We_Need_A_Breakthrough
without adjusting the best performing pull-down delivery combined
banner/landing page from the beginning of this month (although I don't
think we will need the one that follows vertical scrolling. It may
produce 30% but that will be nothing if the remaining ~300 appeal
messages are tested, unless they don't fit the lognormal distribution
that they appear to.)

> That would be complex, and could be a disaster...

What are the possible failure modes?

On Dec 28, 2012 9:46 PM, "James Salsman" <jsalsman at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
> competitive with area tech firms, whether Fellowships should be
> jettisoned, how much personnel to put into the Education Program and
> engineering, and how much of a reserve to invest, preferably with low
> risk instruments which pay above the rate of inflation?

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Steven Walling
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 1:45 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
> competitive with area tech firms, whether Fellowships should be
> jettisoned, how much personell to put into the Education Program and
> engineering, and how much of a reserve to invest, preferably with low
> risk instruments which pay above the rate of inflation?
>

I would prefer all Wikimedia organizations continue to make decisions based
on what we really want to get done (i.e. our strategic goals and
priorities), then find the money to do those things. Not the other way
around.

Steven
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Richard Symonds-3
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
I'm on a train so this will be brief... But let's say we do what you
suggest, and it only raises 90% of what is needed. What then?

I've had to pare back WMUKs budget in the past few weeks to what the FDC
granted. It's difficult enough to do on a smaller budget, I dread to think
how the WMF would do it if they had to. A large organisation lucky enough
to have a good income should use that income to plan ahead, rather than
using fundraising as an artificial cap. You do raise good points on some
subjects though - eg workers remuneration, which is generally poor in the
US - but it's very difficult to discuss that via a public mailing list.
On Dec 28, 2012 10:12 PM, "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > I'm not quite sure what you mean by multivariate analysis
>
> I mean as in the tests done May 16, September 20, and October 9
> reported at
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2012/We_Need_A_Breakthrough
> without adjusting the best performing pull-down delivery combined
> banner/landing page from the beginning of this month (although I don't
> think we will need the one that follows vertical scrolling. It may
> produce 30% but that will be nothing if the remaining ~300 appeal
> messages are tested, unless they don't fit the lognormal distribution
> that they appear to.)
>
> > That would be complex, and could be a disaster...
>
> What are the possible failure modes?
>
> On Dec 28, 2012 9:46 PM, "James Salsman" <jsalsman at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
> > goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
> > optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
> > the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
> > the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
> > competitive with area tech firms, whether Fellowships should be
> > jettisoned, how much personnel to put into the Education Program and
> > engineering, and how much of a reserve to invest, preferably with low
> > risk instruments which pay above the rate of inflation?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Thomas Dalton
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
On Dec 28, 2012 10:12 PM, "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I'm not quite sure what you mean by multivariate analysis
>
> I mean as in the tests done May 16, September 20, and October 9
> reported at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2012/We_Need_A_Breakthrough
> without adjusting the best performing pull-down delivery combined
> banner/landing page from the beginning of this month (although I don't
> think we will need the one that follows vertical scrolling. It may
> produce 30% but that will be nothing if the remaining ~300 appeal
> messages are tested, unless they don't fit the lognormal distribution
> that they appear to.)

But what variables do you want to test? You've only talked about messages.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Birgitte_sb
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
The April fundraiser is on translated messages IIRC. Your suggestion is not at all practical for the fundraising team to implement.

Also it is terrible idea, which ignores the high costs of planning to hold deliberations in a few months which is designed to nullify the results of recently concluded deliberations. People have work to do in January, February, and March. No sane person can be expected to be put in a holding pattern for three months before an organizations STARTS to decide what internal projects will be supported. If you think there is a "talent retention" problem now, well if you had your way the current numbers would be blown out of the water by the coming stampede of departures.

BirgitteSB


On Dec 28, 2012, at 3:45 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
> competitive with area tech firms, whether Fellowships should be
> jettisoned, how much personell to put into the Education Program and
> engineering, and how much of a reserve to invest, preferably with low
> risk instruments which pay above the rate of inflation?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Leslie Carr
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 1:45 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:
> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
> competitive with area tech firms,

I've bit my tongue at this a bunch of times but I need to finally put
my foot down.

Which tech employees are saying that we need our salaries to be at Bay
Area tech standards.  Sure, I'd love a big raise (I'm greedy!).  I
took a pay cut to come work at the Foundation.  However, I'm not
starving, I'm not living in the ghetto with 20 people huddled into a
single room, and most importantly, I knew what my salary was going to
be when I joined the foundation.  I knew that I wouldn't be getting
bonuses, stock options, massages, breakfast, lunch, dinner, baristas,
onsite personal trainers, onsite physical therapists, haircuts,
dentists, business class everywhere (that might have been the hardest
thing to give up!), nutritionists, aeron chairs, dry cleaning,
laundry, and all that.  And you know what -- if I did get those
things, I have a feeling that it wouldn't look too good to our donors,
and we'd be having the exact opposite discussion.  Plus, I can make my
own coffee.

How do we even know that salary is a factor in people voluntarily
leaving?  Has it been established in exit interviews?

If I felt strongly about salary, I wouldnt have a problem speaking up,
but please don't put words in my mouth.

Leslie

whether Fellowships should be
> jettisoned, how much personell to put into the Education Program and
> engineering, and how much of a reserve to invest, preferably with low
> risk instruments which pay above the rate of inflation?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



--
Leslie Carr
Wikimedia Foundation
AS 14907, 43821
http://as14907.peeringdb.com/

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Erik Moeller-4
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Leslie Carr <[hidden email]> wrote:

> How do we even know that salary is a factor in people voluntarily
> leaving?  Has it been established in exit interviews?

In engineering/product, 9 staff members (*) left in the 2012 calendar
year, compared with a dept staff today of about 80. Compensation was
not a significant factor in any of these departures, as far as I know.

5 were let go or mutually agreed that it was time to move on, and 4
left for their own reasons. For the folks we let go, the reasons
typically were performance-related or fit in the broadest sense
(someone can be great but it just turns out their core strengths don't
align with what the org needs). Of the 4 who left entirely on their
own, the primary reasons cited were:

- relocation to a different city/country
- wanting to build their own project
- a challenging and sometimes unappreciative/negative work environment
- a difficult relationship with their manager and/or their colleagues
- perceived lack of autonomy/scope, disagreements about direction.

The SF Bay Area is a weird place when it comes to tech compensation.
Both expectations and realities differ wildly from place to place.
I've had amazing engineers come to me with salary expectations that
are 40% of what they could make at a major tech company. I've had
mediocre devs expect to make 130K before even wanting to entertain the
notion of working at Wikimedia.

We've generally tried hard, as Matthew notes, to find a good place for
WMF in terms of compensation. It's below some companies that are
similar to us, notably Mozilla which is structured as a for-profit
owned by a non-profit and pays market-level compensation (sans
equity). Wikimedia is above most non-profits that do tech work, and
there's a fair bit of room to grow compensation-wise for an
entry-level hire. It's not what people could make elsewhere, and
that's understood by folks who make it through the process.

We've generally been open to have serious comp adjustment
conversations both at the FY review and mid-year to adjust where it
could be a major factor in retaining someone, and have gone
significantly over budget in comp increases this year. I expect we
will need to do so again next year, as compensation expectations are
definitely growing faster than we've been able to maintain our place
on the continuum due to the hot competition for talent.

But the main thing, to keep people motivated, in my experience is not
money. Our job is to take money sufficiently out of the equation so
people don't have to worry too much about it. Where that "not worry
point" is differs greatly from person to person, and some people we're
just not able to hire in the first place. But what matters to people
in the long run is whether they're autonomous, whether they can
develop their skills and grow, and whether they're doing it in a
meaningful context.

This video summarizing some of the related research is worth a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

I think we're exceptional at purpose, we're great at mastery, and we
can do better at creating autonomy. (I think there's often more
autonomy than people realize, but hierarchy can stifle people's sense
of scope and the perceived ability to challenge what's seen as a
top-down mandate.)

Cheers,
Erik

(*) I'm not counting in the above contractors who didn't fill a
requisition but were hired through an RFP and whose role was always
conceived to be temporary.

--
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Florence Devouard-3
In reply to this post by Leslie Carr
On 12/29/12 9:01 PM, Leslie Carr wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 1:45 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
>> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
>> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
>> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
>> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
>> competitive with area tech firms,
>
> I've bit my tongue at this a bunch of times but I need to finally put
> my foot down.
>
> Which tech employees are saying that we need our salaries to be at Bay
> Area tech standards.  Sure, I'd love a big raise (I'm greedy!).  I
> took a pay cut to come work at the Foundation.  However, I'm not
> starving, I'm not living in the ghetto with 20 people huddled into a
> single room, and most importantly, I knew what my salary was going to
> be when I joined the foundation.  I knew that I wouldn't be getting
> bonuses, stock options, massages, breakfast, lunch, dinner, baristas,
> onsite personal trainers, onsite physical therapists, haircuts,
> dentists, business class everywhere (that might have been the hardest
> thing to give up!), nutritionists, aeron chairs, dry cleaning,
> laundry, and all that.  And you know what -- if I did get those
> things, I have a feeling that it wouldn't look too good to our donors,
> and we'd be having the exact opposite discussion.  Plus, I can make my
> own coffee.

I am shocked you could not negotiate for those massages...
Sue is a fan !

Flo

>
> How do we even know that salary is a factor in people voluntarily
> leaving?  Has it been established in exit interviews?
>
> If I felt strongly about salary, I wouldnt have a problem speaking up,
> but please don't put words in my mouth.
>
> Leslie
>
> whether Fellowships should be
>> jettisoned, how much personell to put into the Education Program and
>> engineering, and how much of a reserve to invest, preferably with low
>> risk instruments which pay above the rate of inflation?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
>
>



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

cyrano
In reply to this post by Leslie Carr
Le 29/12/2012 17:01, Leslie Carr a écrit :

> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 1:45 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
>> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
>> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
>> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
>> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
>> competitive with area tech firms,
> I've bit my tongue at this a bunch of times but I need to finally put
> my foot down.
>
> Which tech employees are saying that we need our salaries to be at Bay
> Area tech standards.  Sure, I'd love a big raise (I'm greedy!).  I
> took a pay cut to come work at the Foundation.  However, I'm not
> starving, I'm not living in the ghetto with 20 people huddled into a
> single room, and most importantly, I knew what my salary was going to
> be when I joined the foundation.  I knew that I wouldn't be getting
> bonuses, stock options, massages, breakfast, lunch, dinner, baristas,
> onsite personal trainers, onsite physical therapists, haircuts,
> dentists, business class everywhere (that might have been the hardest
> thing to give up!), nutritionists, aeron chairs, dry cleaning,
> laundry, and all that.  And you know what -- if I did get those
> things, I have a feeling that it wouldn't look too good to our donors,
> and we'd be having the exact opposite discussion.  Plus, I can make my
> own coffee.
So is this document, which states otherwise, obsolete?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/2/2a/Wikimedia_Foundation_Compensation_Practices.pdf

Some quotes:
"annually in July, staff are eligible for a merit increase. "
"The Wikimedia Foundation offers a benefits package for all staff, which
includes medical,
dental, vision and life insurance."
"small services are provided such as coffee and soda.  Food is
occasionally also
provided for working lunches or dinners, at the supervisors'
discretion.  In-office massage
is provided monthly at a discounted rate."
"once a month a staff lunch is provided.  Once a quarter,
a staff outing is staged.  Once a year, there is a holiday party. "
"staff are encouraged to work with their supervisors
to plan for their professional development, which might include
attending a professional
conference, taking a course, or working with a coach.  All spending on
professional
development is approved in advance by the supervisor."
"the Wikimedia Foundation intends to launch a wellness program , in
which staff will be reimbursed, within a set monthly limit, for expenses
related to personal
health and wellness.  These might include for example the costs of
counselling services,
massage, yoga classes, or gym memberships."
"Possibilities may include for example tuition reimbursements
and the creation of a sabbatical program."



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Thomas Dalton
Those quotations don't really contradict anything he said (with the
exception of the massages!).
On Dec 30, 2012 1:10 AM, "cyrano" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Le 29/12/2012 17:01, Leslie Carr a écrit :
>
>> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 1:45 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
>>> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
>>> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
>>> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
>>> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
>>> competitive with area tech firms,
>>>
>> I've bit my tongue at this a bunch of times but I need to finally put
>> my foot down.
>>
>> Which tech employees are saying that we need our salaries to be at Bay
>> Area tech standards.  Sure, I'd love a big raise (I'm greedy!).  I
>> took a pay cut to come work at the Foundation.  However, I'm not
>> starving, I'm not living in the ghetto with 20 people huddled into a
>> single room, and most importantly, I knew what my salary was going to
>> be when I joined the foundation.  I knew that I wouldn't be getting
>> bonuses, stock options, massages, breakfast, lunch, dinner, baristas,
>> onsite personal trainers, onsite physical therapists, haircuts,
>> dentists, business class everywhere (that might have been the hardest
>> thing to give up!), nutritionists, aeron chairs, dry cleaning,
>> laundry, and all that.  And you know what -- if I did get those
>> things, I have a feeling that it wouldn't look too good to our donors,
>> and we'd be having the exact opposite discussion.  Plus, I can make my
>> own coffee.
>>
> So is this document, which states otherwise, obsolete?
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/**wikipedia/foundation/2/2a/**
> Wikimedia_Foundation_**Compensation_Practices.pdf<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/2/2a/Wikimedia_Foundation_Compensation_Practices.pdf>
>
> Some quotes:
> "annually in July, staff are eligible for a merit increase. "
> "The Wikimedia Foundation offers a benefits package for all staff, which
> includes medical,
> dental, vision and life insurance."
> "small services are provided such as coffee and soda.  Food is
> occasionally also
> provided for working lunches or dinners, at the supervisors' discretion.
>  In-office massage
> is provided monthly at a discounted rate."
> "once a month a staff lunch is provided.  Once a quarter,
> a staff outing is staged.  Once a year, there is a holiday party. "
> "staff are encouraged to work with their supervisors
> to plan for their professional development, which might include attending
> a professional
> conference, taking a course, or working with a coach.  All spending on
> professional
> development is approved in advance by the supervisor."
> "the Wikimedia Foundation intends to launch a wellness program , in
> which staff will be reimbursed, within a set monthly limit, for expenses
> related to personal
> health and wellness.  These might include for example the costs of
> counselling services,
> massage, yoga classes, or gym memberships."
> "Possibilities may include for example tuition reimbursements
> and the creation of a sabbatical program."
>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Leslie Carr
In reply to this post by cyrano
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:09 PM, cyrano <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Le 29/12/2012 17:01, Leslie Carr a écrit :
>
>> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 1:45 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> How about for the April fundraiser, instead of setting a dollar value
>>> goal, we agree to use multivariate analysis instead of A/B testing to
>>> optimize the messaging from volunteer submissions in advance, then run
>>> the whole thing for a fixed time frame, say three weeks, and then use
>>> the actual amount raised to decide whether salaries should be
>>> competitive with area tech firms,
>>
>> I've bit my tongue at this a bunch of times but I need to finally put
>> my foot down.
>>
>> Which tech employees are saying that we need our salaries to be at Bay
>> Area tech standards.  Sure, I'd love a big raise (I'm greedy!).  I
>> took a pay cut to come work at the Foundation.  However, I'm not
>> starving, I'm not living in the ghetto with 20 people huddled into a
>> single room, and most importantly, I knew what my salary was going to
>> be when I joined the foundation.  I knew that I wouldn't be getting
>> bonuses, stock options, massages, breakfast, lunch, dinner, baristas,
>> onsite personal trainers, onsite physical therapists, haircuts,
>> dentists, business class everywhere (that might have been the hardest
>> thing to give up!), nutritionists, aeron chairs, dry cleaning,
>> laundry, and all that.  And you know what -- if I did get those
>> things, I have a feeling that it wouldn't look too good to our donors,
>> and we'd be having the exact opposite discussion.  Plus, I can make my
>> own coffee.
>
> So is this document, which states otherwise, obsolete?
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/2/2a/Wikimedia_Foundation_Compensation_Practices.pdf
>
> Some quotes:
> "annually in July, staff are eligible for a merit increase. "
> "The Wikimedia Foundation offers a benefits package for all staff, which
> includes medical,
> dental, vision and life insurance."
> "small services are provided such as coffee and soda.  Food is occasionally
> also
> provided for working lunches or dinners, at the supervisors' discretion.
> In-office massage
> is provided monthly at a discounted rate."
> "once a month a staff lunch is provided.  Once a quarter,
> a staff outing is staged.  Once a year, there is a holiday party. "
> "staff are encouraged to work with their supervisors
> to plan for their professional development, which might include attending a
> professional
> conference, taking a course, or working with a coach.  All spending on
> professional
> development is approved in advance by the supervisor."
> "the Wikimedia Foundation intends to launch a wellness program , in
> which staff will be reimbursed, within a set monthly limit, for expenses
> related to personal
> health and wellness.  These might include for example the costs of
> counselling services,
> massage, yoga classes, or gym memberships."
> "Possibilities may include for example tuition reimbursements
> and the creation of a sabbatical program."
>
>

That's accurate. But there's no dentists onsite, no massage center, no
chefs, no barista making my latte, etc, etc

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



--
Leslie Carr
Wikimedia Foundation
AS 14907, 43821
http://as14907.peeringdb.com/

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Matthew Roth
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Leslie Carr <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> That's accurate. But there's no dentists onsite, no massage center, no
> chefs, no barista making my latte, etc, etc
>

I'm a pretty good barista, so for a small fee, I'd be happy to make your
coffee ;)
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

James Salsman-2
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
> The April fundraiser is on translated messages IIRC.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what this means. Where are plans for the
April fundraiser being discussed?

> No sane person can be expected to be put in a holding pattern
> for three months before an organizations STARTS to decide what
> internal projects will be supported.

I didn't mean to suggest that anyone be placed in a holding pattern,
or otherwise interrupted. I thought I made it clear that I wanted the
Fellowship Program to continue at least until reasonable community
consultation could take place.

> WMF in terms of compensation. It's below some companies that are
> similar to us.... Wikimedia is above most non-profits that do tech work

Could we please have some examples?  I've been trying to identify any
Bay Area tech non-profit or for-profit companies which tend to pay
less than the Foundation, and from the extent of public information,
I'm having trouble finding any, let alone any possible evidence of
"most".

Have any donor surveys asked donors whether they would prefer that the
Foundation pay salaries competitive with local software development
firms? I want to continue to encourage the use of measured data as
opposed to opinion, assumption, and anecdotes. I have reason to
believe from a small informal survey that the majority of donors would
prefer that Wikimedia *meet or exceed* the prevailing pay for the same
labor. I would also love to know how much of a reserve or endowment
donors would prefer that we raise. I'm completely convinced that
donors, the community, and everyone else who interacts with it in any
way would prefer a lot more resources for the Education Program. Have
any of these questions ever been included in a donor survey?

The number of community members who found the "Narrowing focus"
proposal in time to express a strong opinion on maintaining the
Fellowship Program may be less than two dozen, but I can only find a
single community member who spoke in support of eliminating it. I've
looked at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sue_Gardner/Narrowing_focus
and the mailing lists. Can anyone find a second community member who
agreed with eliminating the Fellowship Program?

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Birgitte_sb




On Dec 30, 2012, at 3:40 AM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> The April fundraiser is on translated messages IIRC.
>
> I'm sorry, I don't understand what this means. Where are plans for the
> April fundraiser being discussed?

It means multivariate testing in X languages is siginificantly more resource intensive than A/B testing in one language. Impractibly so for the fundraising team, IMHO. At least that is what I meant with that plus the following statement that you removed. The meaning required both to be read together.

You are subscribed to the same mailing list I am, yet you have been regularly asking people to dig out information that I myself am well aware of. And I do not get any information any place else than this list (except maybe wikitech-l which I am currently months and months behind on). Pay attention or search your own emails.

You may not realize this, but your recent messages seem rather disingenuous. Do your own research. Reply individually to others with the full context intact. Actually address the points of the message you reply to straight on, instead of sending the thread on a tangent. Or else, accept that you will be judged insincere and do not be surprised when people largely stop responding to your emails. I am done myself, unless you alter your approach.

Birgitte SB

(who really hates when people over-snip)
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

cyrano
In reply to this post by Leslie Carr
Le 29/12/2012 22:14, Leslie Carr a écrit :

> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:09 PM, cyrano <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Le 29/12/2012 17:01, Leslie Carr a écrit :
>>   I knew that I wouldn't be getting
>> bonuses, stock options, massages, breakfast, lunch, dinner, baristas,
>> onsite personal trainers, onsite physical therapists, haircuts,
>> dentists, business class everywhere (that might have been the hardest
>> thing to give up!), nutritionists, aeron chairs, dry cleaning,
>> laundry, and all that.  And you know what -- if I did get those
>> things, I have a feeling that it wouldn't look too good to our donors,
>> and we'd be having the exact opposite discussion.  Plus, I can make my
>> own coffee.
>
You're comparing your standard of living with extreme ways of life, and
you reach the conclusion that yours is moderate. However, if you compare
with the rest of mankind, you're still getting things that 99% of them
don't get.

Cheers and happy new year!



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

Oliver Keyes-4
On 2 January 2013 19:25, cyrano <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Le 29/12/2012 22:14, Leslie Carr a écrit :
>
>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:09 PM, cyrano <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Le 29/12/2012 17:01, Leslie Carr a écrit :
>>>   I knew that I wouldn't be getting
>>> bonuses, stock options, massages, breakfast, lunch, dinner, baristas,
>>> onsite personal trainers, onsite physical therapists, haircuts,
>>> dentists, business class everywhere (that might have been the hardest
>>> thing to give up!), nutritionists, aeron chairs, dry cleaning,
>>> laundry, and all that.  And you know what -- if I did get those
>>> things, I have a feeling that it wouldn't look too good to our donors,
>>> and we'd be having the exact opposite discussion.  Plus, I can make my
>>> own coffee.
>>>
>>
>>  You're comparing your standard of living with extreme ways of life, and
> you reach the conclusion that yours is moderate. However, if you compare
> with the rest of mankind, you're still getting things that 99% of them
> don't get.
>
> I think that's probably true, but the fact of the matter is that Leslie is
not saying "here is an extremity, I get less" - she's saying "here is an
extremity that is Standard Operating Procedure at
Facebook/Google/Twitter//insertyourorgofchoice, where almost any of us
could get a job...I get less". In the context of a conversation comparing
WMF benefits with those of similar orgs in the Bay Area that makes total
sense as a statement. I would agree that it is better than 99 percent of
humanity, but I'm not sure who *dis*agrees with that statement: you appear
to be arguing against a position that hasn't been made.

>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>



--
Oliver Keyes
Community Liaison, Product Development
Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?

cyrano
Le 02/01/2013 18:42, Oliver Keyes a écrit :

> On 2 January 2013 19:25, cyrano <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>>   You're comparing your standard of living with extreme ways of life, and
>> you reach the conclusion that yours is moderate. However, if you compare
>> with the rest of mankind, you're still getting things that 99% of them
>> don't get.
>>
>> I think that's probably true, but the fact of the matter is that Leslie is
> not saying "here is an extremity, I get less" - she's saying "here is an
> extremity that is Standard Operating Procedure at
> Facebook/Google/Twitter//insertyourorgofchoice, where almost any of us
> could get a job...I get less". In the context of a conversation comparing
> WMF benefits with those of similar orgs in the Bay Area that makes total
> sense as a statement. I would agree that it is better than 99 percent of
> humanity, but I'm not sure who *dis*agrees with that statement: you appear
> to be arguing against a position that hasn't been made.
>

I'm proud of people like Leslie who work for less money than other
opportunities but for a cause. They stand for their beliefs and their
values, I strongly respect that.
Yet the money of the donations, which is given for a universal cause, is
paying an incredibly tiny subset of humanity with very expensive
standards of life. I think that's something pertinent to consider given
the topic.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
123