Subj : Re: the true meaning of sacrifice To : alt.tv.farscape From : Jim Larson Date : Wed Sep 14 2005 04:50:37 From Newsgroup: alt.tv.farscape Tyler Trafford wrote: > Tyler Trafford wrote: >> Jim Larson wrote: >>> Tyler Trafford wrote: >>> >>>> Jim Larson wrote: >>>>> Rick Savoia wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Trouble wrote in >>>>>> news:cr2dnYSBJ6XG87reRVn-uQ@comcast.com: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Nick wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tyler Trafford wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/7ree8 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't like the precedent that is setting. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Quote from the article; >>>>>>> "So, this is just a different way of getting money out of people." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In thirteen words they've defined just what's wrong with America, >>>>>>> notice they don't mention anything about helping people, or a good >>>>>>> cause... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They're basically turning the relief effort into an anoyance, that >>>>>>> is the first ugly part here, its a tax on your tolerance, not an >>>>>>> appeal to your better neature. Secondly If I weasn't going to give >>>>>>> to a cause, or I already gave what I allotted to a cause, annoying >>>>>>> me to give more $ pushes beyond polite solicitation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> People are going associate negativity from the annoyance with the >>>>>>> cause. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However the children are going to see how much money they made, >>>>>>> not raised, and call it a sucess. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The other children will take away from it a negative view of >>>>>>> charities. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I once had a boss[1] who always collected for United Way and he >>>>>>> always expected you to donate some magical number of $ that only >>>>>>> he knew. I stopped giving altogether because I didn't like the >>>>>>> pressure from my boss. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm sure others have similar experience with manadatory work >>>>>>> donations. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The worst part of mandatory work doantions is it assumes you >>>>>>> haven't already donated your budget to your cause of choice, or >>>>>>> that you are ok with the mission and practice of the charity >>>>>>> chosen by the company. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> One of the things that I learned in running my marathons and >>>>>> raising money is that your cause may not be their cause. >>>>>> >>>>>> One of my very good friends donated to my first couple of runs and >>>>>> then not to my next ones. His son had become a diabetic and almost >>>>>> died. They prefered to send to diabetes research. He apologized >>>>>> for not donating and started to explain why. I immediately stopped >>>>>> him and said "no problem. You have a different priority and that's >>>>>> fine". >>>>>> >>>>>> You can't make people donate to a cause. It makes them resentful >>>>>> of that cause. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> (So...The Larson for Supreme Dictator Fund is doomed from the >>>>> outset?) >>>> >>>> (Yes, because I've been telling everyone that is the cause that "Achy >>>> Breaky Heart" is playing to collect for.) >>> >>> (I have now read that sentence three times, and I still have no idea >>> what it means.) >> >> So, you didn't read the article at the top of the thread? > > Summary: I'm collecting money that will not go to you, while at the > same time instilling resentment towards you (because the donors *think* > the annoying collection is done in your name). > > (It was funny in my head.) Ahhhhh...now it makes...sense is too strong a word, but something like it. (Note to self: Up Trafford's dosage.) -- Jim .