4 ms·
> Why might I want to donate to keep Snopes alive for a few months if the legal problem looms and the site could shut down anyway? A fair question, but why mig
by untog 9y ago
> Why might I want to donate to keep Snopes alive for a few months if the legal problem looms and the site could shut down anyway?
A fair question, but why might I want to donate to keep Wikipedia alive for a year if I'm only going to have to donate again in a year's time?
A donation doesn't always have to have a concrete result - keeping the lights on is a legitimate aim.
- dahart 9y agoWikipedia doesn't have an ownership dispute, right? You're right, and I agree that keeping the lights on is a legitimate aim, in general for organizations not in the middle of a legal battle. My question is whether funds are the primary threat/solution to keeping the lights on, or whether the legal battle is the real problem and whether funds can even solve that problem. I like the service that Snopes provides, and I'm open to donating for a good cause, but I don't know the whole story here, I don't want to declare sides in someone else's battle, I don't want to prolong the inevitable, I don't want to contribute to someone else's pain, I don't want to waste my money on a lost cause, etc. etc.
- TallGuyShort 9y agoAnd keeping the homeless fed and sheltered is also a legitimate aim. But there are charities that do it very well and you can be confident your money will be wisely spent and it may even impact more longer-term projects to help people become self-sufficient again, and there are charities that have other drama going on in the background that means your dollar won't help as much as it reasonably could and you might be buying a philanthropist poser a new jet ski.