-
My intervention ... more specifically sought to ascertain whether it was ethical for Scott to request people's money without any thought of repayment...
Discussion following your post has ascertained (at least how I read it) that 'the forum' absolutely does consider it ethical. Yet you insist upon flogging this dead horse of an argument that it is not.
For your own sake, come to the realisation that you are at least in the minority, very possibly alone, in thinking that what Scott is doing is unethical.
You are welcome to your opinions of the people who use things like GoFundMe to raise money and of the people who choose to donate to things on these platforms, but unless you were of the opinion that Scott's cause was actively harming anyone/anything or that he was deceiving people into giving him money I can't see why you would derail his thread like this.
Actually, I can see one more reason... that you are jealous of the support that has been sent his way.
If you are trying to argue that Scott putting himself out there as a possible recipient of people's money means that less will be donated to 'recognised charities' ie Mind, I don't think that kind of logic is even worth arguing against.
TLDR, you've told us all your opinion, nobody cares.
You are reading a single comment by @M_Vatwork and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
M_Vatwork
It's a public forum, if you're going to post asking for money it's reasonable to expect a certain level of scrutiny. My opinion is not preventing anyone from donating, so why the fervour to silence the discussion? Whether an emotive paragraph about passion and mental health entitles Scott to your money is an individual choice. He's not just asking his mates for more money, but a public forum read by thousands of people. My intervention was not limited to the virtues of Gofundme, but more specifically sought to ascertain whether it was ethical for Scott to request people's money without any thought of repayment, therefore this thread seemed the perfect place for the discussion. Should he have sought readily available and free business advice, or explored conventional funding avenues before going cap in hand to the forum? Does accepting peoples money oblige him to produce a plan outlining how he will use it?
I believe the above are all legitimate avenues for exploration that pertain directly to Scott's request and don't necessarily merit petty insults. This place should exist as a forum for discussion and not echo chamber, regardless of how inelegant my argument has been. Furthermore the whole nonsense appear far more insidious read alongside the numerous PM's I have received detailing BRP's past failure to deliver paid for goods and disappearance when owing money. Guess people don't need to know this before donating.
This whole thing could have been more constructive if folk had championed Scott's cause rather than calling me a cunt. I am not denying his right to ask, rather defending mine to call bullshit. I can't ever imagine feeling sufficiently entitled to ask anyone for 6k no strings attached.
Pedrito - Consumer Champion and ethicist