Paging Pandora

A nice, non-controversial photo of a pole bean seedling to distract you

This post might garner me some enemies...but oh, well, here goes. I've never been one to shy away from controversy in blogland. I might as well not start now. Don't worry, be happy -- right?

Maybe I'm too jaded. A little distance is behind us on the last round of this, although I'm sure more examples of it are probably in the works. Maybe they're happening even as I type, because I don't go into Ravelry much, where the really fertile ground for this activity seems to be. There is the oil spill, after all (you heard about that one, right?), and floods, and earthquakes and volcanoes and famine occurring somewhere in the world, and the hurricane season is upon us. Every natural or man-made disaster seems to spawn another iteration of this, what I consider a disturbing trend in the knitters' online world. 

So the topic of the day is a certain kind of fundraising activity, to wit:

"I am a knitwear designer (or a yarn-dyer or a writer or...who knows). I have designed this pattern for a shawl or socks (or whatever). You buy the pattern, and I will donate 50% (or you name the amount) of the proceeds to (you name the cause)."

Time goes by.

The designer then tweets or posts on Facebook and/or on Ravelry, "I have now donated $10,000 to the cause, thanks to you! Knitters rock!"

The designer is made out to be a hero. Yippee! Much applause and acclaim! You are WONDERFUL! You're SO GENEROUS!

A little more time goes by.

"I have now donated $45,000 to the cause. You guys (the hundreds or thousands of pattern buyers) RAWK!" 

OMG, the designer is an EVEN BIGGER HERO. She's going to single-handedly save the world for her big-hearted donation to this emotional cause. Forty-five freakin' thousand dollars! What a woman! 

But wait. 

The designer has donated $45,000, which is 50% of the pattern proceeds. This means, under the best circumstance (which leaves out the possibility that it's all a big scam -- shhhhh, how dare I suggest such a thing? -- and leaves in the scenario that she actually does make the donation to where she says she is making it) that she has pocketed $45,000, as well, on her end of the balance sheet. I am sure most people are honest, and many of these people we know are upstanding members of our community and they can be trusted. I guess. 

Except for the ones who we thought were upstanding members of the community, have taken money for orders or for knitting retreats, and have then gone on to fake their own deaths and stuff. Man, the non-online-knitters (also known as "the muggles" or some such) who are reading this are probably wondering what I have just sniffed. But yes, the truth is stranger than fiction, and really, could I make this up? It's true. Go ahead, sisteren and brethren, tell my non-knitting readers -- I have quite a few of those -- I am not making this up.

Anyway, back to the rant at hand: Smart! Way to go! Excellent. Great business decision and way to be innovative, seize the opportunity, and build up business! I certainly do not begrudge anyone their capitalist methods and their right to use their smarts and their craft to make a living. Not in the least. As a matter of fact, I even try to do it from time to time myself (make a living with my skills and talents, that is).

Except, this is where it seems a little bit stinky to me: The designer (or yarn-dyer or what have you) has also (presumably) made the big donation to the registered charity, which means she will be able to take a tax deduction for the whopping $45,000 donation as allowable by law, assuming she does what she says she's going to do. And all the people who paid for the pattern because they thought they were doing something great for a cause don't get to make any such deduction, because they bought a pattern instead of just freakin' sending in their $10 to the charity. 

Of course, to be fair, it was the pattern that generated the interest, and without it, maybe everyone wouldn't have paid the $7 or $10 or whatever it is they paid for the pattern to the real cause, so maybe it's not so bad. Is it any different than, say, a bake sale or a car wash? I say it is.

I assert that it is maybe just a little bit off, especially if the designer has characterized this endeavor as, "I've designed this pattern for Hurricane Flugel relief."  

Hmmm. Nope, I don't really think so. You've designed the pattern to seize the opportunity, to fill up your bank account, to get some accolades, and to make a nice hefty tax-deductible contribution to an emotion-stirring cause. It's all good. Or is it just slightly tarnished?

I'm thinking that if you designed the pattern FOR the cause, you would donate ALL the proceeds to the cause. Or at least take a reasonable profit for your efforts and then after a certain reasonable cap -- say $25,000 -- you might donate all the rest. Or something. 

And so at the end of our fairytale, the designer is a huge hero to the knitters, and also a whole lot richer than she would have been had the natural or non-natural disaster not hit. Because how many people would have bought the sock pattern or the shawl pattern if they didn't buy it just because they thought they were helping out The Cause?

I don't know. Is it really just me, or does it leave just a slight bitter aftertaste?

It reminds me of a moment, as the court reporter in a huge lawsuit against Red Cross New England, when I learned that the blood I donated on an every-57-day schedule, which I thought was going directly to help someone who needed my blood, was instead sold by the Red Cross to hospitals and other places that needed blood. An alarmingly small portion of the proceeds goes to the causes that they so generously support, and a very HUGE portion goes to the local and regional directors of Red Cross, whose quarterly income is about four or five or ten times what the average person in Vermont makes. And when those sandwich boards are outside that exclaim, "DESPERATE NEED for blood! Donate today! DANGEROUSLY LOW SUPPLY!" they really mean, "The regional director who gets humongous bonuses for her fundraising efforts really wants to take a trip to Italy and her kids need braces, and plus, her pool needs to be cleaned! Get your ass in here and give blood, you sucker!"

Worse than all of this, the Red Cross wanted to stop a for-profit bloodbank from doing business in the area. And it just so happens that the for-profit agency was the one that the hospitals preferred to deal with, because they were NICER, and plus, their prices were lower AND their blood was tested for more things to make it a safer supply, in addition to the fact that their blood was more readily available when it was needed, and they didn't present the hospitals with a take-it-or-leave-it attitude.

*slam*

It was like a little girl prematurely learning there is no Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy. HUGE wakeup moment.  

Of course, this scenario is different, because the designers in question are being up-front (we hope) about what they are doing, whereas the Red Cross in that situation, not so much.

Now, here's what made me a whole lot reticent to post this:  I do some fundraising here, and so I live in a bit of a glass house. I shouldn't be throwing stones, I suppose. I have never, ever collected the money or the items directly and then sent them so that I could get the full credit for it instead of the donors, and I have never, ever taken a cent in my fundraising efforts, and I'm nowhere in the pipeline. The fundraising that I do requests the items and the money to be sent directly to the charity, and encourages donors to take their own tax deductions if appropriate. My conscience is squeaky clean on this one.

Maybe I'm really stupid and shooting myself in the foot for bringing this up, but it's something that has bothered me (and I know a couple of others, at least) for a while now. I know we can't be the only ones, but then why do the masses of thousands rush to throw their money at these things?

Shouldn't we be a bit more cautious as donors, and thoughtful and honest in our fundraising efforts, or is this really an OK practice?  

Is it just carpe diem and I should shut up already?

Comments

[Kristen]

{hug} (Oh I know you hate hugs. Just shut up and take it!)

I usually prefer to take the ostrich approach in the borderline situations in the knit-charity sphere. Keeps my blood pressure down. Not that scam artists shouldn't get their comeuppance, mind you.

[tinebeest]

Thanks for posting this. I figured it out about the 50% already, but obviously forgot about the tax thing. What happens in the UK with donations is that you tick a box if you're a tax payer and automatically 28% gets added by the government. So instead of getting just my £10, the charity gets "our" £12.8, and I would never make a "second profit". I'm sure there are ways around this, but I'm not terribly clever with taxes so we'll have to wait for somebody else to clarify how to do that then.

And if anybody comes round to give you a flaming, then perhaps they can also care to explain why your doubts are unfounded and clear up the issue once and for all. The gauntlet has been thrown... :-)

[Alison]

OK - random thoughts follow. It's early here. By and large, I agree with you, but these are some of the thoughts you've sparked off.

If I was to release a fundraiser pattern... I doubt it'd make more than a couple hundred bucks. (I'm not a famous Big Name, I have no groupies.) I'd be happy to accept 25-50% of the proceeds as payment against future work arising from donating that pattern. That is, I'm happy donating the work of writing/publishing the pattern, but I'd also be happy to accept some remuneration for all the ongoing, downstream pattern support. Everything from, "Sorry to bother you, but I think the stitch count might be off", through "How does a cable cast on work again?" to "OMG you suck cos I can't make the collar work and it might be 2 aye emm where you live but I don't care cos I emailed you 5 mins ago and you haven't replied and I'll never buy anything from you again because I hate you and you suck!!!" that some internet knitterz have been known to demand. Why am I willing to donate the design but not the support? That's probably a whole other psychological issue, so nevermind...

I like the idea of capping designer profit. If I was a Big Famous Name, that's probably the way I'd go. I hope. Fair remuneration is one thing, but skimming big profits off the top of charity and disaster is another.

I actually also have some reservations about giving 100% of the proceeds to charity, too. The designer will still profit, in kudos, hero-status, possible extra fame, and future sales. Maybe less profit overall, certainly less immediate profit, but still profit. Still a touch of carpe diem, and using the disasters of the world to bolster one's own standing. Long story short, it's still advertising! There will always be people who act in cynicism, and there will also be those that don't.

I know Ravelry recently did the 'help for haiti' thing. (And yes, it bugs me that the patterns are still showing those tags even though the donation period is over). I hadn't really thought about it, but I sort-of assumed that Ravelry was handling the money side of things, but I guess probably not. Call me selfish, but I took that opportunity to buy some patterns (which already existed) and which were in my queue already, and give a little to charity at the same time. My queue is longer than my likely lifespan, so it's perfectly possible that the designers have profited from me buying a pattern that I'll never knit, but I kinda intended to buy those patterns anyway. I would certainly never buy a pattern I didn't like to support a charity - I'd just donate to the charity.

We have a bunch of semi-regular, national charity events in the UK, and I hate them. BBC children in need, red nose day and the like. The Public gets whipped into a fervour of mawkish sentimentality (usually) and overpaid celebrities do telly shows and every ad break urges people to phone in their monetary support. It raises vast amounts of money, but makes me feel rather sick. I would rather people lived a conscious lifestyle of giving, and of not screwing over the third world, every day of their lives. Giving once or twice a year for a big event really doesn't give you a free pass for the rest of your life.

And yes - the tax deductible thing doesn't work that way in the UK, so it's less of an issue for us. It's a very interesting point in the US tax system, though.

Signed, yrs curmudgeonly (and also in realisation that this is longer than most of my own blog posts!)

[Helen]

Nice rant. Love ya.

[Kathy]

This same issue has crossed my mind more than once, especially when the Haiti disaster occurred. I am so glad you finally brought it out of the closet here. I will be interested to see how support on this issue falls. Thanks for entertaining me every day!

[Betsy]

With you all the way on this one Norma...unless I can verify that 100% of my donation goes to those who need it...and I reallyreally believe in the charity, it goes into the family fund...aka the savings account...for our own rainy day when we won't need to ask others for help, we'll help our own...
I've even learned to be suspicious of places where I send knitted items...very few of them post pictures of actual items in the hands of actual recipients...the Red Scarf group being one that does...good for them!
Glad you decided to say something...

[CindyCindy]

Agree or disagree (I agree on this issue, but sometimes I don't), please don't stop. Even if I don't agree you approach your topics with intelligence and balance.

[carol]

I totally agree; but, did someone actually fake her/his death as part of a scam?

[Carole]

I think I've bought patterns with this sort of thing before but I can't say for sure. What you are saying does make perfect sense, though, and I will reconsider how this works for any future purchases. I did not participate in the Ravelry/haiti earthquake thing. I don't know - it just seemed forced to me.

[Kym]

Excellent points, Norma. "Fundraising" is kind of the snake-oil sales of the nonprofit world --- set up to create a sense of urgency, while pulling at your heartstrings and making you (the donor) "feel good." It is offensive when we learn (or just plain old figure out) that "someone" is profiting from "someone else's" tragedy. The issues behind "fundraising" are complicated -- your post shows the "dark side." Keep it up, Norma!

[Norma]

Oh, yes. Maybe even more than once. I'll leave it to others to
expound, because I don't have all the details.

[Emily G]

I felt similarly about the "red" campaign - I'd rather give my $10 to MSF directly than to a third party.

[elizabeth a airhart]

i have been giveing a thought
or more to giveing try to make
sure what little i give goes to
the right place and is used
by the people in need

i am a breast cancer survior
one is most careful of buy this
and i will give that in stores
and ads but i am most careful
with the internet

i enjoy red scarf and norma
out in the open will help
with so many people needing
help care is needed in helping

[noonie]

STand up and applauds loudly... as a fundraiser for Cancer Charities over here in the UK I support this entirely. I think the only charity I've supported online like this ahs been YArn HArlot and MSF, but as she sends us direct to the MSF I was very happy with this. Same goes for red scarf project although I've not supported that one but have been hunting online for a similar project in UK that supports Foster kids over here. To no avail... may just knit a scarf and send it over this year.

Thank you for pointing out what people sometimes forget in their enthusiasm to a support a cause. Donors should always ask that very important question.. how much of the money I am handing over goes to the charity's cause? I was very pleased to see how small a percentage goes to Admin costs in the Red Scarf Project.

[Connie G.]

I echo your sentiments, Norma. Well done.

Though I appreciate that others make donations for some worthy group, we all have our special charities that are near and dear to us for a reason. Most of us, though, contribute and don't shout it from the mountaintops about how much or even if we have made a donation. How about some humility here?

And I applaud you and others who urge us to give directly to an organization by bringing an awareness to that organization through your (and others) words.

Keep it up, please.

[naomi]

Good points. I have bought at least one fundraising-pattern, but it was a pattern I would probably have bought anyway...and I figured it might help out a smidge. If I really want to help some cause, yeah, I'll donate directly. The tax deduction thing is something I hadn't really considered, but I don't itemize. Hm.

[Bonney]

I think you've said what many of us are thinking. I think about that when I see all those shamrocks or whatever hanging in store windows. It doesn't cost them a cent to donate to a cause. Or when they sell those $10 boxes to feed the needy that the customer buys that the store then donates? Ah, well, here's Scrooge signing off!

[Kayten]

Good point, Norma. I missed the most recent charity flurry on Ravelry, too much else going on. I do contribute to Knitters without Borders, but that doesn't work in the way you describe. I have been known to buy a pattern or two in the past. Oddly enough, I can't remember what the crisis was. My other donation areas have been Heifer International and FINCA, which distributes microloans to women around the world to develop family and local businesses, which improve living standards in a cascading fashion.
You always make me think, and I will put this post in my pipe and smoke it for a while, since I'm not allowed cigarettes any longer.

[Jeanne]

Interesting thought provoking post. I'll confess to having bought one of the Haiti patterns, that I may or may not have bought without the possible donation.

And I do appreciate you bringing to your readers attention, other knitters that are doing something for a cause, and the donation goes directly to the cause.

[Terry]

Enjoyable rant. Good to remind people of this. The thought's crossed my mind to do some "charity" like this on my blog, and you've reminded me to keep things as honest as possible.

[Laura from beautiful West Michigan]

I may not always agree with you, but please, never shut up. You make me think through things and I appreciate that!

[Cheryl S.]

This is why companies LOVE to join the Susan G. Komen "Pink" campaigns. They earn a huge amount of money from them.

[Mike]

Loved the fund raising rant enough to come out of the lurker box. Three cheers. Maybe you should get a job in the war room during the next political campaign. I also enjoyed, but wonder about the artificial sweetener "expose." Like did you hear about the study where rats preferred food to cocaine? So is good old food more addicting?

[Cindy in Happy Valley]

Just the reasons I've NEVER purchased an item, of any kind, to support a cause. For me to do so, the cause would have to have the following attributes:

1) The entire profit from the item in question would ALL have to go to the cause. Only the actual cost of making said item would be kept by the person offering it.

2) The item is already in production, is common, and I purchase it anyway. Like the donations of corporations if you purchase their detergent or soap or whatever. Yes, they get a corporate deduction at the end of the day, but it keeps people working (to make the product), I use it anyway, and a cause benefits. Got no problems with this. Seems to be a win-win-win.

Otherwise, if I am moved by a particular cause I donate directly, and I, personally, particularly focus on small, local efforts.

But this is just me!

[adrienne]

I love the way you think! I purchased patterns through rav's Haiti Relief program and felt pretty good about, then the designer posted the tally a few weeks later as you mentioned. I do fall into the category of "probably wouldn't have purchased the pattern otherwise". In my opinion, your method of fundraising/scarf-raising is more righteous. Still, giving is good, especially if others aren't as generous as they should be and need a carrot dangled. Just my two cents. Really happy you wrote this post, though. Motives should be examined!

[Debi3735]

There is a website that will help you decide which charities really use your money properly. I am pretty sure it is called Charity Navigator, spread sheets are included, with salaries, and spending is shown. I never make a significant donation without checking first.

[Patty]

This hits close to home in a couple of ways. I generally just shake my head but you're so good for us Norma - keep on ranting!

[lindy]

Here's something a friend and I talked about yesterday. Hurricane in Haiti. Horrible devastation. Actors/singers get together for big concert/fundraiser aired on national TV. Hurray for George Clooney, etc. Oil spill in the Gulf. Nada for the fishermen, wildlife, etc. Where's John Mellencamp, Jimmy Buffett, Willie Nelson???
Kudos for helping a very poor country such as Haiti, but what about our backyard?
Thank you for letting ME rant.

[Joannah]

Yeah, what she said!

It's sad that "buyer beware" has morphed into "giver beware". Nonetheless, the need is there, we need to figure out how to rise to that challenge.

[Bex]

I have had some of the same thoughts, but for me it wasn't a big deal. In the end, some money got donated (which is good). I bought patterns I was going to buy anyway, and $10 or so is not going to significantly affect my tax deductions. The interesting thing I learned in all this is how much money some people make by selling knitting patterns! Who knew?

[Marilyn]

Along the same lines, do all the companies that have pink ribbons on their products actually give something to breast cancer research? Or do they put the pink ribbon on the packaging and reap the benefits of the public thinking that they are helping a cause by buying the product?

[margene]

Leave it to Norma to say what many of us are thinking. You may get peoples dander up, but you do speak the truth.

[sopanne]

I bought a Haiti pattern for $6.50. $5.00 of it went to Haiti and continues to do so (as opposed to putting the time limit on it and then keeping the flag which I think SUCKS- if it's to be donated- donate it- even if you do make a haul).

I think I am respectfully disagreeing with some of your words. What does a knit-designer have to offer in the face of such a tragedy. She can give her own money or she can use the skills she has to rally others and find a way to help them give en masse. I'm o.k. with the purchase and I like the sense of community that's created.

(full disclosure-I am not a knit-designer- nor am I closely attached to any. I just buy patterns.)

[Birdsong]

Thanks for the well-written, thought-provoking rant! I have looked at these same issues in part myself, since Hurricane Katrina when DH was sent to the Gulf and came back with eye-opening stories about the Red Cross and their mis-management. I have learned to research my charities more carefully and was already a well-informed donor when it came time to make contributions for Haiti; had already donated my maximum allowance to two trusted relief organizations before Ravelry rolled out their bandwagon and decided to pass on pattern-purchasing. I would rather either knit for charity or donate hard-earned cash (especially these days in my part of the globe) to direct services. Thanks for having the cojonoes to speak up.

[Adrienne]

Here's the thing though- I'm guessing that most of the people who buy a pattern where 50% of the profit goes to charity would not have actually donated the equivalent if not for the pattern deal. Part of it has to do with amounts- say it's an $8 pattern. So four dollars would go to charity. Most people are not going to bother donating $4 to charity b/c they think it's too little. (Either that, or they just can't be bothered, or whatever other reason, but IMO it's a pool of people who are unlikely to donate otherwise.)

But if the designer sells 100 patterns, look, the charity gets $400! (I'm just going on the assumption that the designer is honest, I know that's not always the case but let's pretend it is for now.) So from a group of people who would have donated Zero, Charity X now has four hundred bucks. I think this is pretty good.

And it's kind of a pet issue of mine, that people who can't afford to donate hundreds of dollars to charity think they can't do anything. People who can only afford to give $5 or $10 often don't give at all, b/c they think it's too little. But if everyone who thought that way gave that $5, it would really add up.

[Joan (Albuquerque, NM)]

Hi,

Thanks, Norma. Also thanks to Alison--loved your comment!

I understood when I "gave" by buying the Haiti knitting patterns that (1) the designer might not actually give the money, but I choose to believe that they will, and (2) that they get a tax deduction and I don't. But like many others, I chose that moment to buy a couple of patterns that were in my queue anyway.

Recently I bought red yarn for red scarves from a company from a link on your blog... They provided a discount on some very nice yarn, which was darned nice of them. But I expect that for them it is treated as an advertising expense for taxes. They have given me/us the opportunity to send red scarves back to them so they can send to Red Scarf project, and if I do they will enter my name in a drawing for free yarn. I haven't decided but will probably just send my scarves directly to the Red Scarf project and pass up the drawing opportunity. I don't blame the yarn people--they probably just want to be sure that I didn't take their discount and use the yarn for some non-charity project.

I will post my red scarves on Ravelry so you can see that they exist, though I suppose that there wouldn't be any way to check to see that I actually sent them....

[Julie]

First of all -- I am totally doing something wrong, because all my patterns together over all the years I've been doing this have never made $45K! Guess I should put out a charity pattern :)

Secondly -- I agree with all you've said. I think people need to be smart, informed donors, just as they should be smart, informed consumers. My family actually has a registered charity in my dad's name. We donate all our time (there are no salaries or perks -- believe me!), take no cuts and give all the money we make to local charities -- charities that we know personally.

It may be easy to purchase a pattern and feel like you've done something for someone, but unless you get your hands in things, how can you truly say you have?

[Lynn in VA]

OMG do not even get me started on the Komen scam. They make the Red Cross look like kindergartners. The whole idea of linking charity with marketing makes my skin crawl.

But to bring this back to the knitterly world, if you are serious about writing a pattern for a cause, then write the pattern and give it free to anyone who donates directly to the cause. Sure, there will be some scum-suckers who will say they donated to get a free pattern, but better that than the stench of opportunism floating around the designer. Or just donate to the cause, and shut up about it. If it's a marketing ploy you're looking for, then do whatever the hell you want, but don't get all huffy when you get called out on it.

[gayle]

I love to see you with your big stick, stirring things up!
I've always felt that "I will donate X% of the profits of this pattern to Y" was a little smarmy. If you want to make a donation, make a donation. If you want other people to make donations, suggest to them that they make a donation. Capitalizing on other people's pain is not charity.

[Robin V]

Interesting post! For my part, I never buy something just because a portion of the proceeds will go to charity. I do sometimes buy such items, but only because I already planned to (this includes patterns on Ravelry, pink pens at OfficeMax, etc etc). If the seller donates to a good cause, wonderful!

I am okay with their getting the tax benefit - after all, it really is their donation. (For my part, I get a pattern, or a pen, or whatever, at a cost that I must have felt was reasonable.)

If they are crooked and don't make the donation, well, that's okay with me, since I didn't make the purchase specifically to benefit the charity. (And, they'll face their Maker someday...)

That said, PLEASE share details about a retreat organizer who 'died' - sounds like a juicy tale...!

[marianne]

Very well done! and you know where I stand. :^)

[Tola]

Love. This. Post. hate the Red Cross. i donate through my church, because i know that all of the people disseminating the "stuff" are volunteers, and nobody is paid. as far as i know, 100% goes toward buying supplies and shipping said supplies to their destination. Norma, youre ten kinds of awesome.

[Mplsmom]

I agree with you completely, Norma. Another fund raising tactic that drives me crazy are the schools that ask children to sell wrapping paper, chocolate, etc. Do parents not realize that a company is getting free labor from school children to line their own pockets? These companies give schools a portion of their proceeds, but it is usually less than 50%. Not to mention that the products themselves are way overpriced. This has bugged me for years!

[Nora]

I'm OK with the "x% of profits will go to..." deal for pattern designers assuming that's what will really happen. It's up to purchasers to vote with their feet/wallets if they feel it's scammy or would prefer to donate directly. Problem is, short of wiring money directly to an individual in need, it's really hard to know if a donation is going to be used as directed by the giver. We donated through Ox-Fam America to Haiti, after doing some research about the most trustworthy organizations. In sum - I'm NOT OK with large, well-known, heavily-funded tax exempt organizations misrepresenting how they operate or who benefits from their largesse. It happens way too commonly, and it's sick.

[Ruth]

right on. keep it up.

[Becky in VT]

Yup, I'm sure you are opening a pandora's box on this one. But (and I haven't read anyone else's comments yet) I thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.

I think you're right that people should be cautious about businesses donating to good causes. And I say this as a designer who donated 50% of profits (a whopping $22.50) to DWB after the haiti earthquake.

Consumers should be aware when they purchase goods under these conditions. They should be aware that they are purchasing a product, not making a donation. That should be obvious because they receive a product at the end of the transaction. (be it yarn, patterns, or perfume - I bought some from a favorite company of mine doing this same promotion) If it's a product you were going to buy anyway, and the business does actually pass on the money, then all for the good. And I did buy some patterns (and some perfume) under these conditions. But I also made a personal donation directly to DWB, because I wanted to help directly. And the money I donated came from patterns I'd designed in the past, not from something designed "especially" for the cause. And hopefully the people who bought my pattern understood that too.

I think you're right that as consumers we should be cautious and thoughtful about these arrangements. And as business people we should be open about the results (yes, I did take that $22.50 deduction from my taxes) Everything you're saying here rings true to me, because I thought all this through when I decided to donate some of my pattern sales. But I also think you're right that many consumers aren't thinking everything through. And I hope your post will open their eyes. Whether or not this practice continues, we should all be open and up-front about what it means. I like honestly in my capitalism.

[Cookie]

Thank you! Well said.

Just another way for a certain sort of person take advantage of the naive and slightly clueless/out of the loop.

My favorite 'faked her own death' is still that sock designer who 'died' but photos of her tattoos were suddenly being posted by 'another user' at Ravelry. Silly thing. Not everyone is as stupid as she must have thought.

[Jellidonut]

I agree with Adrienne--I don't think too many people will bother to donate the price of a latte, but will feel good knowing their little bits will be added together to make an impact.

I only donate to designers/dyers whose work I like and who I feel I have some sort of "connection" with. I have zero problems with them getting the tax deduction. If that's what it takes to get funds to Haiti etc. I am O.K. with that. Even if that's their main intention (the tax deduction) the good karma wins, IMHO. Someone besides them benefited. That's good enough for me. The fact that they also benefited isn't a good enough reason not to give.

I understand where you're coming from, and this issue has crossed my mind, but I find it sad that we've come to see ulterior motives behind every good deed. I've made a conscious decision to not let this deter me from giving--I just try to give "smarter," as you suggested.

Thanks, btw, for the all the work you do for the Red Scarf Project. It's been on my mind a lot lately, since my own DD will head off to college next year.

[Angela]

I'm even more jaded than you. I'd much rather donate my time or goods to a charity than funds. It's often the volunteer time or office supplies groups need, not just tons of checks. Money can be used for administration only or pocketed, it's usually hard to give away coffee filters or used clothing.

(And, yes, the whole "Look at me being a hero for giving away some of my profits!" thing pisses me off.)

[Chery]

Nail on the head, Norma!!

I have a tale to tell, too. Spent many hours making a small quilt for auction. Sent quilt at proper time, went to the event to buy back my quilt.... the kicker: a worker stole the quilt. It was never auctioned!! I will NOT give to that charity ever again.