blonde poker forum

Yesterday i was absolutely knackered after finishing up for the night but had to run a few errands before bed.

It was about 11am and there were a group of charity workers talking to people in the high street.

Ive got my baseball cap and sunglasses on and my earphones in, not deterred by this one particular girl followed me about 100 yards up the street, she was so persistant and enthusiastic that i thought it polite to at least listen to what she had to say.

The charity she was working for were Amnesty International.

I was so tired that i really didn't want to listen but after hearing her explain what they did, what they stood for, and why she was involved, i couldn't really find any justification for not signing up to donate.

I can well afford the £5 a week that i wound up donating, the charity was worthy and credible, and if this girl was willing to give up her time and make the effort shouldn't I?

I used to give to the nspcc and had planned to again, in fact given the choice would do so over amnesty international, so what I'm wondering is what is an unworthy charity? and will i feel compelled to sign up to every charity that approaches me in the street because in theory i should.

It just so happens that it was them on this particular day.

What i was wondering was how worthy a charity do you think Amnesty International are and with no strong desire to donate but no discernable reason not to would you have signed up?

Plus this girl was absolutely gorgeous  ::)

LOL LOL ... The last line would have been the clincher for me too ;)

This is one of the most worthwhile charities around. If you had to choose one to support this has to be high up on the list.

I also got done on the street by Amnesty, a few years ago now. Similarly, I don't begrudge them the money, but I do now make a point of not talking to any more clipboarded salespeople. I believe (not entirely sure where I got this from, but I've got a feeling there was some sort of TV expose about it a while back) that the people who accost you don't necessarily have any actual affiliation with the charity - they tend to work for some sort of agency, which gets hired by the charity to do this work for them. The agency obviously has to get paid, and therefore the charity doesn't actually see any of your money for the first year or whatever (depending presumably on how much you give them). It's therefore actually better for the charity if you just sign up direct with them.

I think this is the case, but not certain - if anyone knows better, please feel free to correct me... As I say, I don't have a problem with giving them money - I just don't like the idea that the clipboard doesn't necessarily believe a word of the spiel that they give you.

I think it's a very worthwhile charity too.

my general mantra with regards to giving to charity is that if they ask me for a donation, they wont be getting one. I don't think that getting accosted in the street is a very good way to operate, it seems rude and invasive.

I dont feel as if i "got done" and didnt want to give that impression but i understand where you're coming from.

Nor me - as I say, don't mind giving them the money and if they hadn't grabbed me I'd never have done it, so I'm sure it's for the best. It's just I'm now a bit cynical about the impassioned speech you get.

;iagree; There's been a few bits on the news about these guys and how they hassle you to sign up.  Some of them are paid on the number of subscriptions they get.  I don't think AI would be one of these though.

Moskvich is right - these people aren't volunteers, they get paid. They get an hourly wage and have targets of new signups to hit and yes, if you sign up for a fiver a month the charity doesn't see a great deal of your money the first year.

The key to it, though, is that you sign up via direct debit - a fiver goes out of your account every month and you simply don't miss it. Once you've got a direct debit going to a charity for a fiver a month, it takes a pretty cold-hearted person to actively contact their bank to cancel it. I know I've got a couple set up - I can't even remember which charities they're for, but I know the money will be doing some good somewhere.

I work in an area where, when I go to get my lunch, I have to walk along a high street where there are chuggers every day and you quickly become inured against them. However, they are overall moneymakers for the charites - there's no way I'd have given the charities as much money if I had to actively put my hand in my pocket every month.

I have a monthly contract with the SSPCA .   I haven't bumped into the gorgeous girl you mention in your post yet though mate  :D

 ;iagree;

Amnesty International tackle all sorts of problems worldwide including poverty, child abuse, the arms trade, violence against women and a shed load more. All of which is completely unbiased to any political or personal views of those involved.

They have my upmost respect for all their hard work.

I've been a member of Amnesty for many years and believe they do a tremendous amount of good work.

I wouldn't, however, sign up to give money to any of the clipboard carriers you see around so often nowadays.  As Moskvich said, most of them have nothing to do with the charity and I would imagine in the most part are students earning an extra few bob.  I've also been subjected to one or two very aggresive clipboard carriers in the past as a result of politely declining to sign up, thus opening up a conversation about how selfish I was for not joining their charity.  On a separate occasion when I explained that I prefer to choose my own charities to donate to, I was challenged to list all the charities I actively supported! 

It's sad, but now I just look straight ahead and completely ignore them :(

by the way bolt, if you're not sure whether Amnesty are the right charity for you check out their website - amnesty.org.uk  There's nothing to stop you cancelling your direct debit and sending the money elsewhere if you would rather support something else.

wow..it amazes me that an expose was needed for this...afterall agencies recruit for these things regularly.

We have quite a few profesional beggars on the streets of Glasgow these days. They make about 7.50£ an hour (might not be much for some but think about it) and ussually hunt in pakcs of 4 for about 6 hours a day. that costs in wages for them alone 30£ an hour so 180£ a day.
These people might actually believe in what they are doing but they sure as hell ain't doing it for free...and I bet ya it costs the charity more then just the bare wages to get these people out.

Charities say they mainly do it to get their names out andb because once people start giving they ussually don't cancel their direct debit..that's why they can do this...if someone cancels within 3-6 months however they definetly lose out on it.

I personally can't stand the annoying twitching begging little "can i have a minute of your time, Sir" people. they really get my goat trying to inform me of all the bad things that are going on in places they haven't even heard of themselves.

I understand charities need money from people. I therefore decide on a charity each year to add to the one I constantly support, and for a year that charity gets my money. I do not sign up to charities on the street simply because they have people running around like crazed Jehova's witnesses. (no offense to any Jehova's witnesses out there)


BLAH...bad subject for me

I have a huge problem with this sort of thing.
If i want to give money to charity i will. I don't want to be harrassed about it.
I only believe in charities that operate soley in the UK, no offense but that is my view.
I also dislike the fact that charities have advertising and marketing budgets, i understand the need for it but i can't help thinking that if i donate say £100 only a percentage goes where i intended it to, give it to a beggar in the street at least it all goes where it was supposed to!

Chuggers (Charity Muggers) roam the high street in Reading practically every day.

Sometimes you even see them changing there tops as they switch from one charity to another.

I try to avoid them all, like a lot of people say on here. If I want to give money to charity I will I don't want to be hassled into it.

 ;tracet;

The point is that not enough people do give money to charity - the general public does have to be 'hassled into it'.

If we ate our broccoli by ourselves our mums wouldn't need to stand over us waiting for us to finish our dinner.

charities will never have enough money..simple fact of life. There are soo many causes (some just and some unjust) in the world that as soon as a problem would be fixed a charity for another would be created.

Charities generally (unless it's the small ones who don't have any money and solely rely on volunteers) are ussually also very poorly financially managed once they get big. A lot of the charities only put 30-45% of the money they raise towards the actual cause because they have overheads. This is the reason I hardly give any money to big charities.

With regards to your "unjust" comment this is what i was trying to find out, what do you consider to be an unjust charity.

Supposing that the people by whom i was approached yesterday were not agency workers, and given all the factors mentioned in my original post, how can i justify turning them down, or more importantly ANY CHARITY, because no matter who it was yesterday, if they had put there point across as well as they did and seemed as genuinely benevolent as these guys i would've have signed up.

The question i should have asked is, given this, am i now obliged to sign up to every charity that I'm approached by in the street? because it appears to me that in theory i am, and maybe rightly so!

Whether or not you give to charity should be governed by your own personal feelings on the planets well-being. If you care enough, then you willingly give to charity. If you dont care that much, then you shouldn't be made to feel guilty by the street peddlers trying to earn themselves a few quid. You shouldn't in my opinion ever need convincing to donate money, you should already know what/who you want to try and save/improve/help.

To be honest - I'm highly unlikely to sign up for a charity that bugs me in the street. I'll put coins in a collection tin, but the chuggers get on my Erthas. I'd a guy refuse to let me get a word in and start his Greenpeace speil - while I kept looking straight at him, then down at my Greenpeace t-shirt - then back at him until he realised - he appologised - I walked off. I also refuse to put in tins rattled round pubs - "I'M DRINKING - GO AWAY".

I prefer DD donations that go out of the account, get 28% tax relief back and do good - but I'll sign up online, and make sure more of the money goes to the charity.

I'm not sure I like the tone of that - to decide to give because someone stops you on the street is nothing to do with your own personal feelings on the world's well being. To decide whether to give at all is. Also I think you'll find it's the folk with least that give more, so they have to decide whether they can afford to give every time.

I care enough to "willingly" give to the nspcc but haven't sought out any other charity to donate to in the past.

My gathering of information about any particular group would have to have a starting point, why cant that starting point be in the street one afternoon?

I cant give to every charity, i wouldn't be able to afford it yet theres so much in the world that I'd like to improve, how does one go about prioritising these beliefs when each one analysed independent of the others is worth my charity?
(needless to say who i am will dictate what charities i feel more strongly about, though I'm mindful this does not depreciate the urgency of any other charity with whom i sypathise less).

I'm not sure I like the tone of that

??

Nobody expects you to give to every charity.  If you feel you'd like to help with the ones that you may care about, then do so, don't feel under any pressure.  The people in the street don't give a toss about you, they're there to get you to sign up.

There's nothing wrong with getting a taste of what the charity is about from them if you want too, but I'd advise researching anything that may sound like your thing yourself too before signing up.

Don't let anyone put pressure on you or make you feel guilty mate :)

the tone of what?


that is what I was trying to say, I thought I was pretty clear.. guess not


I think you'll find I dont care who gives more, whatever gave you the impression that it mattered?

****



it can if you dont mind being accosted.. its a matter of personal taste. I take donating to charities quite seriously, so spend enough time researching where I dont need people to bug me to get a sign-up. For others its a different process.


I guess you ask yourself which ones matter the most to you. If they matter to you equally, I have no idea at all how you would overcome that. Stick a pin in a list I guess

The phrase "I'm not sure I like the tone of that" is aggressive, argumentative, authoritarian and just a nasty thing to say IMHO to what was a perfectly reasonable post by Tote

You came across as 'if you care - you'll give' - if that's not what you meant fair enough - it was the impression I got.

As for whether the poor give more than the rich, yes it matters. £1 from someone stuggling means they've thought about it, sometimes £1000 from a rich person is a gesture without any impact on them (extremes I know - but that was the point I was trying to make).

Explained in the post above. I explained why & it seems I read it in a tone that wasn't meant. These things happen when everything is typed out & you can't hear the actual tone it is said in. At least I had an explanation of why after saying it.

As for nasty? come on.

Giving to charity is a personal decision. People give money or time for a variety of reasons. No-one should feel pressured into giving anything or judged by how much they give or who they give it to.

I think it is right that poker pros should give more than the average taxpayer. This is because we don't pay income tax or perform a useful role in society. Giving money makes us feel as if we contributing something. We get to choose where are money goes and how much to pay, it is a privilege that the ordinary taxpayer does not have and should be enjoyed.

If I did come across like that, I dont see what is wrong with it as a fundamental ideal anyways, because I think you have to (or should) care about a charity, or what it represents, to give to it. It doesn't mean that if you don't give, you don't care. Venn diagrams should clear it up pretty quickly..

The main point with regards to how much they donate though is in reaction to your initial post, where you said "i think you will find" (which is a pretty demeaning comment), you made it seem like it mattered to me and you found it somewhat offensive. I dont care who gives what. It is irrelevant to me.

Anyways I have limited to zero interest in side-tracking this thread any further so we can take it to PM or just leave it as it is.

regards

The situation i was faced with yesterday was one whereby i could find no reason NOT to donate, though not enthusiastically compelled to do so.

With no literal bearing on the situation i was however reminded of the Sherlock Holmes quote: "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

It got me thinking; shouldn't we start off by saying yes and look for a reason to say no when charitys concerned?

Agreed - think we both read eachother wrong. My appologies.

Can I also appologise for forgetting I had Moderator below my name, I replied as a blondeite, not a mod, forgetting I might come across as some kind of lairy cop being bolshie.

I think I'll need to precede my more argumentative posts as "Rod, the usual mouthy scrote" or something ;).

poker4charity.org

thats my personal choice to donate 1% of my poker winnings too.