Hey guys, as far as I know no one outside of staff is paid on any sort of regular basis for their work on the site.

While there will at some point be sharing and payment systems set up more comprehensively for the site, we want to make sure that A) it fits in the spirit of the site B) is fair and C) it works properly. These things take time, especially since it's just one of a million little things we're working on in the background here at NP.

What we do have is a 'tip jar', where we reward users occasionally for outstanding work. We try and stay as transparent as possible when it comes to who we reward and why, however because it is a private financial transaction it is up to the member to say whether they have been tipped or not. We tipped Typhoon Hunter once because, even though he wasn't local to the event, he provided excellent coverage over a period of *days* on a hurricane story.

I started as a member and then went the wrangler - Guest Editor route and I was never paid for my contributions until I was hired as a full time staff member. When I was being hired I told them, even if I wasn't hired, I would continue to write for free...maybe not a great bargaining move - but it's the truth!

We've been discussing the possibility of having the tip jar be a voted-on item, where users select the best posters from that week/month and then vote on who should get tips, there are pros and cons to both approaches. What do you guys think?

Edit: I should add that Sanjay Jha and Dave Keating are regional editors who were hired on to help flesh out our international coverage and cover alternate time zones. They have set shifts and work certain hours and are most certainly staff members. There might have been some confusion regarding that. There should be a page up showing who is actually staff at NP in the near future.

Thank you for responding to generaldecay's question, Rob. Personally, I think if a voting system is set up for "best posters from that week/month" or, if members "say whether they have been tipped or not." is asking for more of the same events that occurred when the "ranking" system was put in place. Due to this, I (again personally) would give "voting" careful consideration before putting either in place.

All along, NP has said that they are going to share money with contributors. Other than a very very very few, it hasn't happened. (I know of 3, one of whom received a substantial amount in a bargaining ploy, two who richly deserved it).

I don't think that any monies that are ever distributed should be based on the leaderboard stats, as they're flawed and skewed against writers. Nor do I think they should be voted upon as all it takes is say, one or two relentless "gotta be #1" types to launch a campaign and there ya go--influenced stats. (shout-out to Rhonda!) I don't think that hats ought to figure in it. I've seen people who have hats work to help the site and others; I've seen people use the hats just as their own promotional base with no concern for the site and others. I do think that longevity, the number of people who have someone as a favorite, and participation overall (meaning visiting other people's work to comment, and when possible, offer help) should all count.

For the record, I've been here a year now, am honored to note that 120 people have put me on their favs list (thank you!), do my best to participate with others, not just post my own stuff or flag my own stuff, I've never flagged my own stuff, and I don't just flag a buddy or two but try to find and GS varied materials from varied contributors, and I've helped out lots of people in private emails.

I suspect that none of those things will matter doodly when money's handed round--if it ever is.

I've always been here just for the fun of it and to see how this comes out overall.

As always, I remain independent in my views. I've neer received a dime from NP, and have no financial investments nor interest in this site.

Thanks for the "shout-out", PEP.