zlacker

[return to "Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive"]
1. Drbles+jW1[view] [source] 2023-11-17 02:59:57
>>mikece+(OP)
2022 Salaries for those interested: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824...

Compensation Key Employees and Officers Base Related Other

Jim O'leary (Vp, Engineering) $666,909 $0 $33,343

Ehren Kret (Chief Technology Officer) $665,909 $0 $8,557

Aruna Harder (Chief Operating Officer) $444,606 $0 $20,500

Graeme Connell (Software Developer) $444,606 $0 $35,208

Greyson Parrelli (Software Developer) $422,972 $0 $35,668

Jonathan Chambers (Software Developer) $420,595 $0 $28,346

Meredith Whittaker (Director / Pres Of Signal Messenger) $191,229 $0 $6,032

Moxie Marlinspike (Dir / Ceo Of Sig Msgr Through 2/2022) $80,567 $0 $1,104

Brian Acton (Pres/Sec/Tr/Ceo Sig Msgr As Of 2/2022) $0 $0 $0

◧◩
2. darthr+Rm2[view] [source] 2023-11-17 07:19:15
>>Drbles+jW1
I'll ask the question you're implying out loud.

Why does an organization with about 50 employees need 4 C-level executives, totalling about 2M compensation per year? Or perhaps it's 7 C-level executives (3 hiding under the "Software developer" title) totalling about 3,7M compensation per year?

I'm absolutely not donating money to such a thing without an answer to this question. As a counterpoint, I am a member of a local (Finnish) non-profit organization, one of whose many services is Matrix. This costs me 40 euros per year and none of that money goes to C-level executives.

◧◩◪
3. jefoza+Jo2[view] [source] 2023-11-17 07:39:30
>>darthr+Rm2
2M in comp distributed between 4 people is not a lot at this scale in my opinion.
◧◩◪◨
4. theshr+rt2[view] [source] 2023-11-17 08:29:07
>>jefoza+Jo2
It is for a non-profit asking for donations. If they want half a mill salaries, they should become for-profit instead.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. anjel+mv2[view] [source] 2023-11-17 08:48:19
>>theshr+rt2
The beauty of non profits is everyone thinks they're staffed with saints, when the truth is far less beatific.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. morava+tF2[view] [source] 2023-11-17 10:28:58
>>anjel+mv2
Absolutely. A former student of mine worked for a non profit in Afghanistan (his home country) for a few years. Said non profit was flying in McKinsey consultants for very short gigs at six figures (USD).

Same can be said about many LGBT non profits that have shifted their goals in the developed world on the "T" part of the acronym. On countries where marriage equality is a given, no one is going to fund an NGO focused on gay marriage... so they need a new cause to fight for.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. _ugfj+XH2[view] [source] 2023-11-17 10:51:56
>>morava+tF2
to me this smells transphobic but it's possible the trans genocide several US states are working on made me oversensitive
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. lannis+TS3[view] [source] 2023-11-17 17:03:59
>>_ugfj+XH2
How is it transphobic to say organizations focused on LGBTQ shifted their alignment for the one part that isn't widely accepted in developed because others for the most part are?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. dragon+GU3[view] [source] 2023-11-17 17:10:20
>>lannis+TS3
Its a transphobic conspiracy theory to say, as moravak1984 explicitly did upthread, that they did it for money not because its an actual real issue where they perceive an injustice, whereas the issues where they've already won, and thus are shifting some attention from, are not, or less so, specifically because they have succeeded in shifting the situation on the ground.
[go to top]