January 7, 200719 yr My problem isn't with the time factor, it's that by clicking that link and encouraging many others to do so you're lining the pockets of a CEO in a higher ratio than the money going to charity. Would not the effort of advertisement be better spent simply on proper charitable organisations that are pretty much pure charity. But then is lining that executive's pockets okay because some money is going to charity? :-k "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo"
January 7, 200719 yr My problem isn't with the time factor, it's that by clicking that link and encouraging many others to do so you're lining the pockets of a CEO in a higher ratio than the money going to charity. Would not the effort of advertisement be better spent simply on proper charitable organisations that are pretty much pure charity. But then is lining that executive's pockets okay because some money is going to charity? :-k I have to say, despite how 'terrible' (in lack of a better word) this whole idea is. It is indeed incredibly ingenius. I have to give a hand to the creators, this is, as I already said, simply ingenius. Me doing staff.
January 7, 200719 yr I have to say, despite how 'terrible' (in lack of a better word) this whole idea is. It is indeed incredibly ingenius. I have to give a hand to the creators, this is, as I already said, simply ingenius. Taking advantage of people's charity is nothing new, but I suppose with the internet it's now easier than ever. "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo"
January 7, 200719 yr My problem isn't with the time factor, it's that by clicking that link and encouraging many others to do so you're lining the pockets of a CEO in a higher ratio than the money going to charity. Would not the effort of advertisement be better spent simply on proper charitable organisations that are pretty much pure charity. But then is lining that executive's pockets okay because some money is going to charity? :-k Who's effort are you referring to? You crampin' my style.
January 7, 200719 yr My problem isn't with the time factor, it's that by clicking that link and encouraging many others to do so you're lining the pockets of a CEO in a higher ratio than the money going to charity. Would not the effort of advertisement be better spent simply on proper charitable organisations that are pretty much pure charity. But then is lining that executive's pockets okay because some money is going to charity? :-k Who's effort are you referring to? The guy who made this thread's, and all the other type of threads or notices or bulletins or e-mails all over the internet advertising the site. I appreciate it's hardly any time relatively, but i'd rather this kind of generosity and effort was put into "genuine" charities. "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo"
January 7, 200719 yr If you think clicking link is making an effort for charity, you're smeg near deluded. It only takes you the time to go to a post office, buy a letter and envelope, and send your money and support, by any method or form, to make an effort. That way, the charity actually gets the money. But money alone will do naff all. Volunteer. Get involved. Spread the word. Do something, but please, do not start clicking a link all the way up there on your high horse. The thin air will only fail to serve your already failing mind even more. This is how much you all raised for charity. Thank you.
January 7, 200719 yr If you think clicking link is making an effort for charity, you're smeg near deluded. It only takes you the time to go to a post office, buy a letter and envelope, and send your money and support, by any method or form, to make an effort. That way, the charity actually gets the money. But money alone will do naff all. Volunteer. Get involved. Spread the word. Do something, but please, do not start clicking a link all the way up there on your high horse. The thin air will only fail to serve your already failing mind even more. Definitely agree with that. Moving onto a slightly different subject... I'd like some opinions on this. A friend of mine and I are organizing a Valentine's Day dance for people who are mentally and physically handicapped. Is this a waste of time where I could be organizing a charity that is more beneficial to those in need? You crampin' my style.
January 8, 200719 yr If you think clicking link is making an effort for charity, you're smeg near deluded. It only takes you the time to go to a post office, buy a letter and envelope, and send your money and support, by any method or form, to make an effort. That way, the charity actually gets the money. But money alone will do naff all. Volunteer. Get involved. Spread the word. Do something, but please, do not start clicking a link all the way up there on your high horse. The thin air will only fail to serve your already failing mind even more. Definitely agree with that. Moving onto a slightly different subject... I'd like some opinions on this. A friend of mine and I are organizing a Valentine's Day dance for people who are mentally and physically handicapped. Is this a waste of time where I could be organizing a charity that is more beneficial to those in need? If that is a sadistic attempt to try and incite a sick response from another Forum user, i seriously doubt you're going to be successful Umm...no it's not. My question is simple. By hosting a dance, I'm not contributing anything to improve someone's lifestyle like money or food. It's one night of a really good self-esteem booster. I just want to know if that can be considered charity. You crampin' my style.
January 8, 200719 yr If you think clicking link is making an effort for charity, you're smeg near deluded. It only takes you the time to go to a post office, buy a letter and envelope, and send your money and support, by any method or form, to make an effort. That way, the charity actually gets the money. But money alone will do naff all. Volunteer. Get involved. Spread the word. Do something, but please, do not start clicking a link all the way up there on your high horse. The thin air will only fail to serve your already failing mind even more. Definitely agree with that. Moving onto a slightly different subject... I'd like some opinions on this. A friend of mine and I are organizing a Valentine's Day dance for people who are mentally and physically handicapped. Is this a waste of time where I could be organizing a charity that is more beneficial to those in need? If that is a sadistic attempt to try and incite a sick response from another Forum user, i seriously doubt you're going to be successful Umm...no it's not. My question is simple. By hosting a dance, I'm not contributing anything to improve someone's lifestyle like money or food. It's one night of a really good self-esteem booster. I just want to know if that can be considered charity. Oh sorry, i thought it was something different... I'll edit my post :oops: I didnt mean to be harsh... Talking from that point of view, such a contribution would be very benifical to those of of a less-fortunate lifestyle. Having had an experience with 'special need' children, im well aware the children are in need of self-esteem and resassurance. Now i see, great idea :thumbsup:
January 8, 200719 yr The dance is a good idea, but shouldn't be any greater or worse than if it was for people without difficulties. One may argue that while accommodating for an event like that would be more difficult and time consuming, the reward would be the same. That's not to say it's not worth doing. It's truly great what you're organising. This is how much you all raised for charity. Thank you.
January 8, 200719 yr Nah, I'm too lazy. Supermonk, proving you wrong since 1992. Supermonk rocks, I want to have his children.Music is like candy. You always get rid of the rapper.
January 9, 200719 yr bump Lolz. :P I haven't read through all of the posts, because it's rather irritating to read a circular argument. But anyway, Matt, you're complaining that all of the money doesn't go to charity. How do you think they get money to keep the charity running though? The Salvation Army hires full time workers to go around the country and do charity work, they pay them full time wages. Where do you think they get this money? It's ridiculous to expect 100% of the money to go straight to charity, and it's even more ridiculous for a hypocrite like you to cry about it. Ghost: I am prejudice towards ignorance, so that would explain why I appear to be so.
January 9, 200719 yr There is a big difference with paying people to work for a charity, which has tax breaks and goverment grants and initiatives to maximise productivity of the organisation, than a company whos aim is pure profit. Mercifull <3 Suzi "We don't want players to be able to buy their way to success in RuneScape. If we let players start doing this, it devalues RuneScape for others. We feel your status in real-life shouldn't affect your ability to be successful in RuneScape" Jagex 01/04/01 - 02/03/12
January 10, 200719 yr Whether you can feel it or not, its near the time of giving again. I do have one request. Each and every one of you can help for free just by clicking a few buttons. http://www.thehungersite.com/ http://www.thebreastcancersite.com http://www.thechildhealthsite.com http://www.theliteracysite.com/ http://www.therainforestsite.com http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com Each of these websites has a button that says "Click here daily, it's free!" If you do that, money will be donated to a cause. There is no obligations, no spam emails, just clicking a few buttons. Please click these daily, it will be worth it. I don't trust this. How do I know its not just a huge corporate scam? How do I know that my clicks really do benefit the needy? If you want to give back, don't reject beggers. At least then you are positive you gave someone a better chance toward a better life.
January 10, 200719 yr I clicked em, but I have a feeling its a load of [cabbage]...but its worth a shot
January 10, 200719 yr Author why is everyone so doubtful lol. Maybe have faith that people arnt terrible enough to trick us with faking to be a charity (which is illegal by the way)
January 11, 200719 yr why is everyone so doubtful lol. Maybe have faith that people arnt terrible enough to trick us with faking to be a charity (which is illegal by the way) But they clearly state, "Profit organization". Me doing staff.
January 11, 200719 yr why is everyone so doubtful lol. Maybe have faith that people arnt terrible enough to trick us with faking to be a charity (which is illegal by the way) But they clearly state, "Profit organization". You know they don't have to trick you, it's called altering the facts, a lot...
January 11, 200719 yr You know what would really kick povert in the [wagon], if every rich person in the world was taxed a small percentage and that money then given to the poor.
January 12, 200719 yr Clearly you have no idea of how the world actually works. This is how much you all raised for charity. Thank you.
January 15, 200719 yr No need to bump threads. Removed the bump, don't do it again. Cheers. "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo"
Create an account or sign in to comment