Her answer to her $2.5 million compensation sounded a bit entitled or aloof for someone heading an open-source project (https://answers.thenextweb.com/s/mitchell-baker-aGY62z).
I'm definitely not a fan as you can tell but wanted to see if others have been thinking this or if there's something I'm missing.
Paradoxically, the small cash flush company is a nonprofit, while the larger bankrupt one is for profit.
Worse, the larger for profit company is simultaneously attempting to he a research institute, an advocacy group and a service.
I see no problem with the ceo making a "big" paycheck given the industry and location, but I do have major reservations about the seemingly directionless steering that they and their board have done.
This is not a critique of the individual research project, some of them being great, but just because Google gives you a big wad of cash does not mean you can spend it without a plan, or that you can do "everything"