undefined | Better HN

0 pointsozgrakkurt8mo ago0 comments

You could say “you bought a ps5 with my money” though.

If that person had the money, they should have spent on medical bills. If they got it after, they should have paid you back before buying a ps5 maybe.

Or if you just gave them the money and don’t expect any accountability, it is ok.

0 comments

sothatsit8mo ago

But that's the whole point: they did pay their medical bills. It's not like they didn't pay their medical bills and instead bought a ps5. They did both.

Mozilla develops Firefox, and they also pay their CEO a lot. Their CEO may be overpaid, the company may be mismanaged, but at least they are still upholding their commitment to maintaining Firefox. Picking out one expense that you don't like and saying "all the donations go to this, see!" is just disingenuous.

Whether donating is worthwhile is another question, and it seems like the answer would be no. But it is a very different thing to say "All the donations just go to the CEO" instead of "I think the CEO is paid too much".

We could also cherry-pick in the other direction and say the CEO is negotiating deals to bring in the 90% of non-donation revenue of Mozilla, in which case you could easily say that his pay is a result of that revenue creation.

rishav_sharan8mo ago

I think the key here is that they didn't have money to do both.

If they had money enough for medicine, then why beg for donation?

sothatsit8mo ago

I'm not trying to defend Mozilla begging for donations when they really don't need them. My point is that cherry-picking one expense that you don't like, and then saying all the donations go to that, is cherry-picking the financials, and is misleading.

2 more replies

Forgeties798mo ago

You gift me $100 on Venmo or cashapp or whatever to go dinner with my partner. I transfer it to my bank. It’s in the same bank account as all my other liquid cash. How can either of us ever say whether or not I spent that specific $100 on dinner?

Mozilla/FF has a pot of money that donations go in to, which is the same pot they use to operate as well as pay people, which includes their CEO.

1 more reply

ta12438mo ago

If donations doubled, would CEO pay double?

If donations halved, would CEO pay halve?

I suspect the answer is "no" to both of those.

sothatsit8mo ago

Exactly, so the donations are not being funneled to the CEO, and suggesting that they are would be silly.

If you split up your donation by how Mozilla actually spends its money, then most goes to operating Mozilla, and a small amount (~1%) goes to paying the CEO.

Forgeties798mo ago

I agree but your tone suggests you’re disagreeing with me? That’s the point I am driving at. Directly linking every donated dollar to the CEO’s pay simply because they’re close in number does not make sense.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

sothatsit8mo ago

But that's the whole point: they did pay their medical bills. It's not like they didn't pay their medical bills and instead bought a ps5. They did both.

rishav_sharan8mo ago

I think the key here is that they didn't have money to do both.

If they had money enough for medicine, then why beg for donation?

sothatsit8mo ago

2 more replies

Forgeties798mo ago

Mozilla/FF has a pot of money that donations go in to, which is the same pot they use to operate as well as pay people, which includes their CEO.

1 more reply

ta12438mo ago

If donations doubled, would CEO pay double?

If donations halved, would CEO pay halve?

I suspect the answer is "no" to both of those.

sothatsit8mo ago

Exactly, so the donations are not being funneled to the CEO, and suggesting that they are would be silly.

If you split up your donation by how Mozilla actually spends its money, then most goes to operating Mozilla, and a small amount (~1%) goes to paying the CEO.

Forgeties798mo ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse