3 ms·
Fantastic point. I personally would much rather support the Internet Archive than WF. Also, there is a 2:1 donor match thing happening now, making the value of
by filmgirlcw 7y ago
Fantastic point. I personally would much rather support the Internet Archive than WF.
Also, there is a 2:1 donor match thing happening now, making the value of each donation effectively triple. Moreover if your company matches 501(c) donations (mine does, at least up to something like $20k a year), you can have them match your donation too, effectively giving the archive a 4x your original donation.
- lonelappde 7y agoMatching doesn't "effectively triple" the donation, because the matched part is someone else's donation. Deceptive tactics like this are toxic to charitable giving culture.
- Stratoscope 7y agoIf the matching helps persuade people to donate, I'm all for it. The Internet Archive is a world wide treasure. Please donate! And it's really easy to set up an automatic monthly donation as I have done. One time donations are great. Ongoing income helps insure that this precious resource can continue to fulfill their mission.
- Aeolun 7y agoI’m just happy they have a monthly option :) most services seem to only consider wanting to give once.
- filmgirlcw 7y agoIf the donation is contingent on someone else donating first, semantics aside, it’s the same thing. My employer wouldn’t donate to the Internet Archive in the amount that I gave unless I did first.
- zrm 7y ago> Moreover if your company matches 501(c) donations (mine does, at least up to something like $20k a year), you can have them match your donation too, effectively giving the archive a 4x your original donation. Wouldn't it be 6x, assuming your company could have their donation tripled as well?