and will need extra money to get an old beater truck,

but for my new fun ride, a Fiat Abarth! If 100 people give me $50 that would be greatness!

It's a joke, as was that sorry excuse for a motor vehicle.

who are in need. We are all adults and can decide these things for ourselves.

I donate to homeless people DIRECTLY when I see them on the street, I don't care what they do with it, or even if once in a while, they don't perhaps need it.

Most liberals understand that it is the 'giving' that matters, and don't generally worry too much about the rest.

We are scammed far more by our own government and their Big Bank donors than we could ever be by someone who may not actually be starving, but isn't even close to the league of the crooks we just bailed out with TRILLIONS who collapsed the world's economies.

How does your personal practice help stop you from having to bail out some of the worst financial scammers in the history of the world, as many have described it?

Thanks for your concern, 'give and you shall receive'. Not a reason for giving, and receiving doesn't necessarily mean money, but it helps people not to become cynical and selfish to try to help others whenever they can.

And as another good DUer said, 'I don't care if they buy wine or beer or cigarettes' with it, as Right Wingers always used to 'warn' me about. Once I give it to them, it is THEIRS and none of my business.

Yours may differ from mine, and that's fine. I just like to check to make sure the recipient is legitimate. I do the same with organizations I'm considering for a donation. I check to see what percentage of donations are actually used for the purpose they claim, rather than for "administrative" costs.

I don't care how others make their decisions.

trouble with in my name. That way she could be sure that I was using it for what I said I was.

Thanks for sharing that idea. I like it.

Either give or don't. We're all adults and can make our own decisions on whether to trust someone or not and whether to give or not without you lecturing us and implying that we should do what you do.

You seem to be telling me what I should and shouldn't do on DU, though. I can make my own decision about that. Thanks.

had to say, just as you do.



ETA: BTW, do you ever respond to threads with topics you don't like? Also, how do you manage to admonish me for taking the side of the person who needs help and giving them the benefit of doubt and not being judgmental about whether they are legitimate or not? I think DUers are good enough judges of what is a scam and what is not without lectures on how everyone else is doing it wrong.

You don't, apparently, care for his opinions.

By contributing to his thread, you're giving his views greater visibility. That's how this site works--that's what all those "milestone" posts are on the front page...

as for not caring for MM's opinions, that is not the case at all. What I don't like is the father-knows-best tone of his posts of this type. Indeed I like MM. I just don't like inferences that I don't know what I'm doing.

I tend to write rather formally, in general. That's my habit, from years of writing informational material professionally. My intent is to inform, not to do anything else. Since people get scammed on the Internet with some frequency, I thought a description of a way to check on donation requests might be useful to someone. No "tone" was intended at all.

accept your explanation and offer my apology in this case.

I take it into consideration when I post, but I often present information simply and in a straightforward way anyhow. It's my style of writing. Whether someone considers it "lecturing" isn't really one of my primary concerns. The information is.

I like reading your posts. You often make useful points that are rational and well thought out. What I do with your information is my choice. When it comes to giving, I, too, am very careful. Confession: most of my giving is to help animals but even then I am careful. Keep up your so-called "tone", I love it.

I like your posts.

I'm admonishing you for your very own "father knows best" attitude towards MM's post. I mean, really, you have the nerve to admonish the guy with

8. Who cares about your strategy for giving to DUers who reach out for help?


and you expect anyone to care about YOUR feelings after that wet turd of a post? Who's playing daddy, here?

I think you read too much into what you believe is a person's "tone" -- but you just might be dead wrong about that. I didn't see him "infer" that you don't know what you're doing. I think you "inferred" that all by yourself. That's your fault, not his. He's talking about his POV and soliciting comment. Your response is to tell him to STFU, basically--because you mistakenly believe he's talking about YOU and you think that no one should "care" about what he says.

Then, you double down--you don't like MM's "lecturing" -- but you have no problem lecturing the rest of us with your view about how we should think/feel:

I think DUers are good enough judges of what is a scam and what is not without lectures on how everyone else is doing it wrong.

What about those of us who might not agree with what "you" think? The world does not revolve around YOUR opinions, either.

The person with the "tone" problem is you. This is a discussion board. The object is to discuss topics that people bring up. If you don't want to participate in the conversation, skip the thread. If you don't like the poster's tone, ignore the poster. Or don't. But if you don't, don't try to shut people up and then complain about their "tone." It just comes off as hollow and false if you do.

If you don't like his attitude--and you indicated that you did not--put him on ignore. Then everyone's happy.

When I respond to a post with which I disagree, I know full well I'm kicking it and it will result in further discussion. Your comments about "lecturing or implying" are hostile, frankly. How would you like it if a thread you started was greeted with "I don't like you lecturing or implying to me" about whatever?

You're the one being rude in this exchange, IMO. It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable, but your "You're judgmental, I don't like your tone, DUers don't need to listen to you, you're lecturing, who cares what you think" approach to conversation is personal and frankly, rude. All your comments are about MM, personally, not about the issue he raised, which was verifying the validity of a request for help--as if no one, EVER, anywhere, ever tried to scam people out of their money; like this is unthinkable, and "good liberals" would never do such a thing. The truth of the matter is, that people all over the world do this kind of thing--we've had posts here on DU about waitresses falsely claiming orientation discrimination and getting tens of thousands in donations from those "soft hearted liberals." Everyone's heard a story or ten about someone who faked cancer, or worse, shaved their kid's head and faked it by proxy. People DO lie. People DO prey on other people. To start a thread to talk about it is NOT a crime, and your "inferences" that MM is somehow a lecturing, evil scold for bringing it up and asking for input is just wrong.

I hope I've articulated my POV with sufficient clarity. Please let me know if there's any aspect that is unclear.

much about myself. Thank you.

I have cleared this up the MM, by the way, while you were writing all of that and I have apologized for MY reaction to his OP, one of many following CCD's cry for help, which I think are more a reflection of jealousy or envy that he's received nearly $6000. But since what I think is wrong, I guess I should apologize for having any opinion on the matter at all.

Thanks for taking the time to explain to me why, in your opinion, I am wrong in this matter. I wil take it to heart.

all."

Sigh.

It's NOT ABOUT YOU.

You are welcome to your opinion; just don't take the comments of posters as if they are directed at YOU personally, that YOU are found wanting, or that YOU are the focus of the opinions of others.

This is a discussion board. Discuss. And try to not be personally disparaging. That's all I'm saying.

I am not aware of the specifics of what motivated this post; I've seen a few requests for help on the board lately, but I haven't focused overmuch on them. I do think that this is a useful topic in general, regardless of whether it was motivated by specific recent events.

that responded to his OP, just as YOU did, even though he didn't post specifically to YOU.

I agree with MM more often than not. He is well aware that I take some of his stuff as lecturing and he has admitted that I'm not the only one he has heard that from. And I have apologized. I can't tell if he accepted or not, but I'm sure it was not a wasted apology and I meant it so that is good enough for me.

Also, he does quite well defending himself.

That "Who cares about your strategy" post was dismissive and rude. You made enough comments to make myself and others think that you took his comments personally.

He told you that he puts out the information and his writing style is what it is.

The truth of the matter is, we can't all love everyone. Some people just aren't a good fit. That's life--you deal with it and move on.

And just because he does quite well defending himself, doesn't mean he couldn't use someone watching his back. There's no "rule" against that here, either.

pointed out the perception of my own post. Why you choose to keep drawing this out, I don't know. Somebody has to have the last word or we end up doing this all day. I thought my apology would provide that last word.

I do think you have a bit of difficulty sussing out "tone" in written communications.

If you want "the last word" do have it. I was simply engaged in a discussion--if you don't want to have that discussion, I'm out!

have explained that I sometimes have difficulty sussing out tone in written communications (context and tone can be challenging sometimes and the only way to staighten it out is to draw it out, as I have done here, mistaken or not), just as others have the same difficulty with my writing.

I have also apologized to MM (twice now). That's not really a bad way to get the last word, even if I wanted the last word for some self-centered reason, is it?

In another thread, someone had made a request for funds from DUers. Since then, that request was hidden by a jury, based on some research on the Internet. Now, I have no idea whether anyone made a donation or not, and didn't go look to see.

I'm sure there are legitimate requests for help on DU, and I've donated to DUers in the past, but I always do a little checking before donating, just to verify some of the information, if possible. Most of the money I donate, though, goes to organizations that help individuals, rather than to individuals themselves. Those organizations are better able than I to determine who is in the greatest need, I believe, so I check the organization to make sure donations go where they are needed.

I don't want to waste the limited charitable funds I have available. That's the only reason I exercise some due diligence.

a very recent join date.

These posts about whether or not to give to established DUers are, I think, a reaction to CCD's cry for help. CCD is an established DUer who is not known for scamming other DUers. The fact the person has an account with a donation website, like gofundme.com, and who has given their PayPal address gives me all the information I need to help someone and leaves me secure knowing that, even if I got scammed, I did what I felt was the right and kind thing to do. If that person turns out to be a scammer, then they are the one who needs admonishment for scamming people, not me for falling for it based on my caring gesture.

whether to donate or not to any individual. I described mine. Length of time on a discussion website isn't one of my considerations. There are many people with long tenures on discussion forums to whom I barely give the time of day or even bother to read their posts. Longevity isn't all that meaningful to me in that regard.

I have a friend who is as close as a relative who was bailed out by the St. Vincent de Paul society. I was so impressed with how they helped my friend--no questions asked, no faith test, no nada, they just saw need and helped-- that I donated money to them. I also have given some coin to a religiously sponsored "feeding center" for the homeless, because they're very transparent about their finances. I regularly donate to a volunteer food pantry that is non-denominational as well. I do a lot of driving old folks around, to the doctor, grocery etc. and I do several hours of transportation runs for people who need to get to the polls on election days.

I don't care if the charity is religious or secular, I care about the money being used to help people. I too have limits--charity begins at home, after all and I am a soft touch for a relative in need --and I don't think due diligence is a bad idea. I don't think it is a "crime" or that you are being "mean" to say so, either.

themselves as truly helpful to those in need. The St. Vincent de Paul Society is one of those, as is the Union Gospel Mission here in St. Paul, MN. Despite the religious connections with those organizations (I'm an atheist), their track record of providing real, material help to people in need is excellent, so I'm happy to support them. Results are my guide, and not much else.

Normally, my donations go to organizations that help people in the very worst of situations. For me, that's the foundation of help for those who most desperately need it. I don't care who's helping or what their motivations might be, as long as the help is real and provided without prejudice.

And, while I didn't and wouldn't have donated, I had felt there was a bit of piling on the poster. Perhaps deservedly so, it seems. I'm curious- do you know what came out that caused it to be hidden? You can pm me if ya don't wanna post it here.

attacked Democrats. Apparently the poster has been timed out over there for too many hidden posts. There's a thread started by trumad that gives the details down the thread.

It was that that prompted my OP today. I don't usually post in trumad's threads because he would prefer that I didn't and because there have been some negative interactions between us.

Like many people, I've been scammed in the past by requests for assistance. So, I'm more careful now than I used to be.

Found the results in the other thread. Probably a good hide.

"cowman_in_nv" was banned over at Discussionist recently. "cowman" was banned on DU2.

the content of "irony's" posts on Discussionist is roughly the same in tone and ideology as "cowman" on DU2.

I just couldn't get into Discussionist at all. I signed up, but didn't find any discussions I wanted to join, so I haven't been back.

NOBODY cares about YOUR opinion of feeling "lectured" by another poster.

My opinion is it was a pretty informative piece....It may not change the way I give OR don't, but I come here to learn..relate....find common ground and not accuse someone of lecturing. This is a FORUM....

You also mention: "I just don't like inferences that I don't know what I'm doing."
I'm sorry but I didn't see where ANYONE INFERRED YOU didn't know what you were doing. You are reading something into his post that is simply not there!

made breakfast, and looking forward to a great day.

Thanks for your comments.

You can disagree without dissing senior posters.

not with this nick because I took a hiatus while I was going through some personal stuff and a big move. When I came back I couldn't remember my password and my recovery email was a throwaway I used at the time to avoid spam.

You and I used to be quite chummy. I don't think I've changed much.

Ha -as I posted on the other thread - I've been scammed by real life folks and that's no reason to stop helping folks in need. I can't help anyone in the cyber world given demands here but if I could I would help regardless of the possibility of being ripped off.

Still MM is a great DUer in my book and he's entitled to his view on the matter.

And so am I.

As for donations, I would prefer to be scammed than miss a chance I had to help someone who may be in legitimate need, as I believe CCD to be. I am convinced some of these follow-on posts about giving are a negative response to the response CCD has received, namely response in the form of $6000, an amount that is subject to the human nature of others who may also need help but either don't ask or don't feel their need rises to the level of homelessness. In other words, I prefer to make a gut judgement on legitimacy and then err on the side of compassion.

on both points

And I have always been a malaise fan.

donations - one that has been hidden now by a jury. I became aware of it from posts about it in trumad's thread about DU requests for donations. You can find more information in trumad's thread. Requests for donations are not a common thing on DU. They're actually fairly rare. But the one that was hidden was interesting and prompted my own thread.

I do not normally post in trumad's threads for personal reasons, so I started my own thread that discussed such donation requests generally, not specific requests. As always, I'm happy to explain any post of mine if there is any question about it.

responses and haven't seen the hidden post.

I am well aware how rare request for financial help on DU are. I've been here since 2006 as a member and lurked for a while before that. The rareness of requests and whether or not the request is from an established DUer is all I need to decide if I want to donate. I don't launch an investigation over whether or not to send 20 bucks to a fellow DUer. If I feel I need to investigate, I simply don't and I don't give either.

Sometimes I may come across as being rude, I'm mostly not trying to be. I am the type of person who just says what I have to say. My friends in RL respect my straightforward, hold-nothing-back ways and often seek my advice because they know they aren't going to be bullshitted and they will get an honest opinion and/or honest advice. Sometimes, in writing, just as I have pointed out my issue with the tone of some of your stuff, it comes across in a way that is not reflected in my concurrent mood.

Again, I apologize for the tone of my own response to your OP. I'm a construction worker from way back, not a writer and, as such, not very good at literary tact. I just say what I'm thinking and, as I have done to you, I am misunderstood.

I'll respond to criticisms as best I can, though. I'm very consistent about that. I want to be as clear as possible, so if I am misunderstood, I'll always try to make myself understood.

and I'm glad he posted it.

I've thought about donating, but never do because of scams.

MM's advice is sound.

It's a discussion board, ya know? So he started a discussion. What is your problem?

Chill out.

posted. MM knows that I sometimes read him as being smug or lecturing and he has admitted that I'm not the first and that he can, indeed, come off that way. We have hashed it out and I think we're all good.

His tips are good. But I tend to go with my gut when it comes to DUers based on their record here and their willingness to be investigated. I prefer to err on the side of compassion, rather than launching an investigation into the person seeking financial help. If I get scammed, that is on the scammer. I did my part, even if was misled. And, while I may get angry for being scammed, I don't feel like a dupe because my intentions were honorable.

Actually, I read it because I generally agree and enjoy MM's posts. This time, I perceived a lecturing tone based on too little information about a hidden post I did not see.

It's all in this sub-thread. I'm surprised you missed all that. I did apologize, btw.

It's hardly earthshaking stuff, but doing that has helped me make decisions about individual donations over the years.

I rarely donate, but these are good things to remember next time I'm tempted.

http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/10025341390#top

This is a subject that DUers are interested in, apparently.