Mikael,Only one member of the Boards has thus far disagreed in this email thread. Have there been others who have responded to you directly?Best,Jackie--To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msVery well, so it seems we won't add this to next year's grant proposal. I'm still keeping it in mind as a last resort if the administrative backlogs are further increasing, but I also hope that the alternative of having a hired associate editor will decrease the burden significantly anyways.--I also forward a response from Diptanshu on this matter.Best regards,MikaelOn Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 4:49 PM, Dr. Diptanshu Das <das.diptanshu@gmail.com> wrote:Dear MikaelI strongly oppose your proposal of such a compensation. Thanks Michael for already having put the salient points prior to me. WikiJournal is not just another journal system the expenses of which are borne by Wikimedia Foundation. We are more. We are built on the principles of Wikipedia. Those who do not have any association with the free knowledge movement or who are not associated with such collaborative contribution would simply not understand this. Our objective should be to attract candidates who are not familiar with the free knowledge movement. So, I assume that being a volunteer is a pre-requisite. Michael is right in pointing out that if we cannot make the project run on volunteers, perhaps we need to reconsider the model.I need to mention that over the last several years the sister project affiliation committee has not approved a single sister project (barring Wikidata which was approved entirely on different grounds) because the projects have not proved themselves fit to be run by volunteers alone and that granting Wikiversity the status of sister project has been considered one of the biggest blunders of the WMF.Please forward this email to the respective boards of which I am not a member.RegardsDiptanshuPlease do not print this e-mail unless you really need to.On Sat, 11 Aug 2018 at 13:22, Michaël Laurent <michael.laurent@gmail.com> wrote:______________________________Personally I disagree. There are numerous projects within the Wikimedia foundation and most of them rely on volunteers. If we cannot expand it to a critical mass without throwing money at it perhaps we should first reconsider the model.Again I propose to look at some of the Frontiers journals. They have a huge board of reviewers facilitating peer review. Perhaps we should invite more editors too.BW MLOp vr 10 aug. 2018 22:54 schreef Jackie Koerner <jackie.koerner@gmail.com>:I think this is a very reasonable proposal. I do think this should be discussed annually in case we need to adjust to be a more appropriate amount. This would be, say as workload and demands increase, or as budget overall increases, the stipend might be adjusted.--Best,Jackie--Hello again,--I have informed the board at WikiJMed that I would prefer to see someone with more time than me to be the editor-in-chief when my term ends by New Year, and the Assistant editor-in-chief has expressed a similar attitude to it. Yet, the only other candidate to the editor-in-chief position has also expressed reluctance to it. For the long term survival of the journals I think we need to add a monetary compensation to editor-in-chiefs, and practically also to add an incentive to apply to this position.I think an annual compensation of let's say $2000 for each editor-in-chief and $1000 for each assistant would be a humble start as part of the grant application for next year, especially considering that average salaries for editors-in-chief in the US are about $85.000 (link) and $57.000 for assistants (link). Also, it is very humble comparing to the generally $100.000+ that many people make within Wikimedia Foundation (link), and the income of $91 million that Wikimedia Foundation received in 2017 (link). Thus, we can definitely adjust this amount further in the future depending on the success of this grant application.Best regards,Mikael
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WJH board" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wjhboard+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to wjhboard@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wjhboard .
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wjhboard/CACubOwiRUpiFW7qQ .mnhoyF8PzvMFOLWSeDuEjUNF3X1Hrv caGQ%40mail.gmail.com
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WJM board" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wjmboard+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to wjmboard@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wjmboard .
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wjmboard/1B0C88E5-4A35-418 .2-87FD-BF132B4AFF79%40gmail.co m
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
_________________
WikiJournal-en mailing list
WikiJournal-en@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikijournal-en
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WJH board" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wjhboard+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to wjhboard@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wjhboard .gid/wjhboard/CACubOwj5rVGjVeN% .3DuNHt%2BNvpMagFLmoOLUeh3ibOgd J60kpCEA%40mail.gmail.com
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .