Useless Conversation

[Cyrrex]

It isn't just you.  I can't get over the feeling that these celebrities are doing it to shamelessly promote themselves and probably have no clue what the disease is or who Lou Gehrig is.

Also, when fucking Ronaldo does it in his underwear, but Kate Upton does it dressed like my grandma?  No.

[Phildo]

Certain celebrities have been pretty good about it (Charlie Sheen, the Foo Fighters, etc), but watching random people on Facebook do it got tired almost immediately.  It IS raising a lot of money, though.

[RhyssaFireheart]

Is it wrong that I'm not caring much about this ice bucket thing, even tho I just watched Loki drench himself ?

I dunno.  Maybe it's because I'm on holiday.

/fans herself frantically.

Oh sorry, were you saying something?

[Ironwood]

Nothing that my wife didn't hear for the blood rush either, don't worry.  Also, Thor.

 

[RhyssaFireheart]

Nothing that my wife didn't hear for the blood rush either, don't worry.  Also, Thor.

 

Oh LAWDY!  Where's my fainting couch?  I'm going to need it!

 

[Yegolev]

It's always OK to not care.

[Samwise]

I've become incredibly annoyed by all the people claiming that it's the primary cause of California's drought.  Does that count as caring?

[RhyssaFireheart]

I've become incredibly annoyed by all the people claiming that it's the primary cause of California's drought.  Does that count as caring?

Wait, people are saying that the ice bucket challenge is the reason California is in a severe drought?  Seriously? 

[Merusk]

Never underestimate the power of stupid people to completely misunderstand simple concepts.

[HaemishM]

I don't even... how would that even work? 

[schild]

Is it wrong that I'm not caring much about this ice bucket thing, even tho I just watched Loki drench himself ?

I dunno.  Maybe it's because I'm on holiday.

The ice bucket thing is maybe the dumbest thing that ever went viral. So no, it's not wrong to not care.

I don't like their choice of charities.

Also, dumping ice on yourself is stupid.

[Rasix]

Is this better or worse than the Harlem Shake?  Maybe they can use that for Parkinson's.

[Ironwood]

Ouch.

[schild]

I just... I don't know. I intensely dislike charities that don't have immediate pay off. There's enough disaster and poverty and whatnot going on in the world that they really could've attached this stupid fucking fad to a charity that may actually do something in the near future.

That Harlem Shake joke was pretty good though. B+ to you, Rasix.

[Ironwood]

I was directing the ouch at the parkinsons thing.   

[schild]

Obviously.

[Rasix]

That was more tame than some of the other inappropriate fund raising methods going through my brain. 

Anyhow, it's good they're raising money.  Good for them.  Still don't get the bucket thing and the videos aren't very entertaining, but whatever, free money for something worth giving money to.

[WayAbvPar]

A cure for ALS is definitely worthwhile. It is a fucking terrible, awful, hideous death sentence. I am pretty sure I would rather have my head sawed off on Youtube by some ignorant savages than die a little bit every day for years.

[schild]

ALS is awful. For sure. And we know fuckall about it.

When it comes to charity, I'm super duper pragmatic. If I donate cash, it ain't being given to something that requires money, a wing, and a prayer.

[Ironwood]

Like Hex ?

 

[Nebu]

When it comes to charity, I'm super duper pragmatic. If I donate cash, it ain't being given to something that requires money, a wing, and a prayer.

That's actually a very good thing.  I wish more people vetted charities.  If you saw how small a percentage of the donation gets to the end goal, most people would find a better way to get the money where it's needed. 

If you're going to donate money, always find out how that money is spent. 

[schild]

Like Hex ?

 

I'm not donating to their legal defense fund. I could sell my account and make more than 200% of what I put in right now if i wanted though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[WayAbvPar]

ALS is awful. For sure. And we know fuckall about it.

When it comes to charity, I'm super duper pragmatic. If I donate cash, it ain't being given to something that requires money, a wing, and a prayer.

I completely understand vetting charities (think of the poor Krakatoans!), but how do you find a cure without throwing money at it? I tend to donate to literacy programs and food banks myself, but I am just curious if you are against this specific charity or disease-based charities in general?

And yes, shit like Susan G Komen sets a terrible example, and if the ALS charity runs like that then fuck them.

e-
If these assholes are against the ALSA then they can't be all bad.

[Phildo]

I saw something the other day about how they do animal testing, so that might not be up some people's alley either.

[schild]

I completely understand vetting charities (think of the poor Krakatoans!), but how do you find a cure without throwing money at it?

This is not an argument for picking ALS over buying books for students or providing food to really really fucking poor people. There's a problem of scale. All of these peoples $50 or $100 or whatever is better spent on actual human suffering rather than something that will spend $5B USD before any progress is made.

[DraconianOne]

I am pretty sure I would rather have my head sawed off on Youtube by some ignorant savages than die a little bit every day for years.

I hate to break it to you...

[Cheddar]

Tomorrow is last day with my business unit, bittersweet.

On the one hand I am excited for a new adventure; on the otherhand it will be strange not having my network to lean on.  In particular, I am going to miss the associates I have worked with in a variety of manners.  This feeling was unexpected.

Strange days.  Life is good :)

[Viin]

You'll get over it when you realize the new people you work with are basically just like the old people, except different!

[Selby]

I can't get over the feeling that these celebrities are doing it to shamelessly promote themselves and probably have no clue what the disease is or who Lou Gehrig is.

As someone who watched a close family member die from it, I consider all the shameless celebrity plugging to be annoying.  It's nice people are bringing it attention, but 2 weeks ago they didn't give a fuck and in another 2 or 3 weeks they probably won't again beyond that warm "I did a good thing!" feeling that some people love.

[Cyrrex]

I completely understand vetting charities (think of the poor Krakatoans!), but how do you find a cure without throwing money at it?

This is not an argument for picking ALS over buying books for students or providing food to really really fucking poor people. There's a problem of scale. All of these peoples $50 or $100 or whatever is better spent on actual human suffering rather than something that will spend $5B USD before any progress is made.

I almost feel like a dick for agreeing with you, but I think I do.  How much money have we thrown at cancer, and what good has it done?  I have no doubt that some lives are improved or even saved through earlier screening efforts, but how many starving kids could you have fed with the same money?  It is just as likely that we'll cure cancer (if it is ever really cured) through accidental discovery totally unrelated to any of these programs.  Or we'll stumble across technologies like stem cell research and totally shun it anyway.  Or the government will develop nano-tech.

I don't mean to make light of cancer.  Like any of you, I have had people very close to me suffer and die from it.

I am also willing to be wrong.  Are there any real examples of these charities where we can claim to have totally eradicated a killer disease as a direct result?  I am still convinced that the goat I sent off to Malawai a few years back is the best charitable donation I ever made.

[schild]

I personally can not come up with a single charity group that has made meaningful progress on any disease.

[lamaros]

Because of course you are an expert in all the relevant fields.

[Cyrrex]

Why be a dick?  It is a fair question.  People feel an obligation to donate because it is "for a good cause", which in theory it is, and I'm sure many people are fooled by the not-for-profit nature of these charities - all they while oblivious that there are plenty of people drawing a sweet salary from the deal.

Is it actually leading to any real good that couldn't be better accomplished elsewhere?

[Merusk]

March of Dimes and Polio

As for the utterly stupid argument of money better spent, how about giving to one of these instead, which do exactly what you're arguing for:
UNICEF
Ronald McDonald House
St. Jude Children's Hospital
United Way

[Cyrrex]

March of Dimes and Polio

As for the utterly stupid argument of money better spent, how about giving to one of these instead, which do exactly what you're arguing for:
UNICEF
Ronald McDonald House
St. Jude Children's Hospital
United Way

March of Dimes is a good example, had forgotten that.

For the rest of your list, yeah, fine...I would definitely prefer to give money to any of those.  I was thinking more about specific charities for specific diseases.  I am not by any means trying to shit on the concept of giving to charity.