On 02/25/2010 11:56 AM, Nevin Liber wrote:
Then comes the "which jobs do we pay for?". If a reviewer spends 80 hours doing a detailed review, should we pay them too? What about all the people who tirelessly work on getting a release out the door every quarter? Why should they work "for free" if other people are getting paid? If we don't make enough money from web advertising, you can't just not pay the review managers. Who will make up the deficit? Etc., etc.
I understand the sentiment behind paying an honorarium to encourage people to do work, but I just don't see how it is practical.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Boostpro [1] could be that financial backend behind these kind of payments. Hence that organization would decide which areas of Boost needed active improvement in order to pay for it. All in all, I'm not advocating for the payment-based approach. I just understand that the current scheme doesn't work well and I don't think it will change by itself. [1] http://www.boostpro.com/