After discussing this with the people most often using the mutual aid community and feedback here we will be making a single change.
Meta posts will no longer be permitted in !mutual_aid@hexbear.net critical meta posts must not be about specific users and posted in !feedback@hexbear.net at risk of removal.
We will change the mutual aid sidebar to remove the clause permitting meta posts, we will also ask that users post once a day so that everyone’s post’s can be seen but this is not a hard rule as it is pretty clear that removing posts is a last resort in that community. This joins the other community recommendations that users include currency, how much is needed, updating when a user has received funds, or updating/locking the post when the need has been met.
This will be unfeatured in about 12 hours
~~Hello users of hexbear:
Due to recent meta posts in our mutual aid community we wanted to open up discussion about the community !mutual_aid@hexbear.net
We will never require explanation or justification from a user asking for aid in the community, and the mod and admin team continue to commit to not featuring an individual’s mutual aid request to prevent unfair exposure.
In addition, we will maintain a strict “No critical comments or meta comments” on a mutual aid post.
This post is to discuss the mutual aid community’s rule of allowing meta posts: mutual aid as a community, those making posts in it and those commenting on posts.
We are considering removing the exception allowing meta posts but wanted to involve the userbase before committing to a change.
Please comment with any thoughts, feelings, or suggestions regarding this change.
Thank you~~
You must log in or register to comment.
After discussing this with the people most often using the mutual aid community and feedback here we will be making a single change.
Meta posts will no longer be permitted in !mutual_aid@hexbear.net critical meta posts must not be about specific users and posted in !feedback@hexbear.net at risk of removal.
We will change the mutual aid sidebar to remove the clause permitting meta posts, we will also ask that users post once a day so that everyone’s post’s can be seen but this is not a hard rule as it is pretty clear that removing posts is a last resort in that community. This joins the other community recommendations that users include currency, how much is needed, updating when a user has received funds, or updating/locking the post when the need has been met.
Wanted to update what the considered changes to the community are in summary: users can post 3 times a week, asks no more than 100$ each post display name is changed to “emergency aid” users communicate if they are open to non monetary resources (local aid groups, etc.) user requests aid, amount requested in title using [$0/$x] format users donate and report the post with the amount donated, mods note it or report it with a message indicating they donated so a mod can comment user updates title with amount received and the thread is locked when the goal is met meta posts are no longer permitted We will do a follow up post where voting on keeping the community as is or changing it will occur. If you want to propose changes to this summary please answer in a comment below this one. do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested? do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts? you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating? do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid? do you think we should allow meta posts?I said this in our DM, so I’ll say it publicly. I used to be a step parent. One day, my ex’s sister got arrested and I became a parent to an extra kid over night. We needed hundreds of dollars to make him comfortable, and just to keep him out of state custody (drug tests, handling old traffic tickets, ect.). We got that money mostly from here. Between family and Hexbear, we got an extra $500 that week and we used every cent. Just the drug tests for the courts were $60 a person. Yes, there were resources for foster parents that we got access to later on, but those took months to access. We got his Christmas with those, and we were hit with this the day before Halloween. There’s no reason to arbitrarily cap how much people can need/give, that’s between the people who give and receive.
Yes to all except the amount cap. The problem isn’t so much the amounts requested but the frequency of those requests overshadowing other people who also need help. If someone really needs a large amount with a good justification, it would be a shame to limit the help we can give them.
I have not properly investigated the conditions that led to this discussion, but:
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
No.
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
No.
do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
That seems messy and inconvenient, no. Honor system.
do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
No.
do you think we should allow meta posts?
More meta posts about doing things IRL to help alleviate the root causes of poverty.
The money limit thing is very dumb.
I agree with everything except limiting the amount requested. That seems arbitrary and would make the comm useless to people who need more than $100 (or whatever limit we would set), as emergencies often are more costly than that especially in the current economy. Imo the other requested changes would greatly improve the experience for both requestors and donators without setting a hard cap on how much someone can ask for.
This
deleted by creator
I think the theory is that a limit to how much each person could ask for allows for more people to use the comms for help, as most donators will have a limited amount to give each week. I agree it’s just too rigid in practice to be a useful change though, especially since the admins couldn’t give exceptions without effectively endorsing the fundraiser, which they understandably don’t want to do.
I see people saying this but without evidence that proves putting a limit on fundraising would actually allow more people to be helped overall, we are just deciding what to do based off of vibes/what sounds right. Personally, I don’t think that’s good enough when considering such a serious rule change.
especially since the admins couldn’t give exceptions without effectively endorsing the fundraiser, which they understandably don’t want to do.
For sure, it seems pretty far out of scope to expect mods here to decide who is and who isn’t entitled to extra help. I know leaving it up to the discretion of those giving poses it’s own problems, but I think it’s better (or at least more manageable) overall.
A posting limit might be okay but I don’t think we should limit amount asked.
Tracking would be nice
No need to change the name, it’s just semantics at that point.
No meta posts, if users have actual proof of scamming, they should submit it to the mods and admins.
This all seems like it’s going to make it so difficult. I was first directed to mutual aid by someone I met on a suicide pact forum. I was on there asking for someone to help me commit suicide because I was so desperate due to my financial situation. Benefits stopped, overdraft maxxed out, rent debt racking up, no money, just a huge pile of debt. With no money for food I’d been trying to use the food bank, but it was awful. To try and prevent people using it if they don’t need it, they have strict rules in place. The main one is that you have to be referred there from someone like your GP or citizens advice, someone who can vouch for you that you really are in need. This means needing a GP or citizens advice appointment, even if it’s just a phone appointment to explain and prove your circumstances, it could be a really long wait for the appointment or phone call. Then needing to wait for the actual food bank appointment. The amount of food the food bank gives was never enough to last while trying to get referrals and appointments to go back again. I was hungry regularly. So much so that I was trying to get help to end my life and tried selling my prescription meds online as I had no other source of income. Someone on the suicide forum told me about mutual aid, that’s how I came to be here. And while I do sometimes have to make multiple posts to get a response, it’s still so much easier and quicker than the food bank. My worry is if you add these extra rules it is going to become as difficult to get help here as it was from the food bank. And for me, as well as many others, this is the last chance saloon. We have nowhere else to turn. Making it harder here could be the final straw for many people.
don’t limit the amount requested
we won’t be, the users who post in mutual aid and those who comment or donate are overwhelmingly against it as well as most of the userbase at broad
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
I don’t think this is very helpful, different people will have different financial situations, and if we are trying to focus more on emergency aid, some emergencies are much more costly than others. I think this will actively encourage “spamming” at the start of a week and the comm will get flooded with requests all at once, making it much easier for some to slip through the cracks.
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
This one I agree with, especially with a focus on emergency aid, though I think the mods may have to make exceptions in very specific circumstances, someone having two massive disasters in one week is rare, but not unheard of. I doubt it will ever actually come up though.
do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
I like this idea a lot. I would rather donations not be loud public displays, I don’t feel comfortable donating in such a way, but just a simple tracking system will go a long way, while not actively spotlighting anyone, plus I think seeing locked posts that have had their goals met will be good for morale.
do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
I think since mutual aid is probably a bit too difficult to do over an online anonymous system like this, it is probably better phrased that way.
do you think we should allow meta posts?
I think a monthly meta thread could be good, one that enables people to ask for aid that isn’t necessarily financial, more things like advice and support. It could also be a good way to “allow” meta discussion without it taking over the comm.
I think a monthly meta thread could be good, one that enables people to ask for aid that isn’t necessarily financial, more things like advice and support. It could also be a good way to “allow” meta discussion without it taking over the comm.
I like this idea. A regular megathread of advice and resources would actually feel more like mutual aid than just charity.
seems like a lot of overcorrection that gets in the way of helping people who actually need.
Here is my public position.
- do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
No.
- do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
No.
- do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
No.
- do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
Put it to a vote.
- do you think we should allow meta posts?
No, put it to a vote.
- users communicate if they are open to non monetary resources (local aid groups, etc.)
Unnecessary. This already occurs when requested.
- user requests aid, amount requested in title using [$0/$x] format
No. Add rule to ask to voluntarily do so if it fits the context of their needs.
- user updates title with amount received and the thread is locked when the goal is met
No to a hard rule. Yes as a voluntary obligation to requestors as they are able to and no unless specifically requested.
Limiting the amount requested is a fucking awful idea
- users can post 3 times a week, asks no more than 100$ each post
I don’t like the idea of setting a limit on dollar amount. That would be a huge setback for users who are asking for help with things like rent, bills, and losing your house to an IDF terror attack.
As for limiting # of posts per week, I think the problem of visibility on that comm needs to be looked at: even before I ruined it for everyone, I noticed that donations would dry up the moment my post got too old and stopped being “hot,” even with a lot of bumps.
I’ll address the other stuff after I take a nap.
because different users can set a different default post sort it is difficult to do anything on the back-end to increase post visibility. I don’t think you ruined it for anyone i just think that right now so many people need help and the average person here may be more strained than before.
Is it possible to create an auto-bump bot that bumps the posts in the comm once a day or something, without users needing to trigger them?
It is possible but would require someone to develop the bot
Ah gotcha. If I knew how to code I would :/ just curious do you even think that would be helpful if it were developed? Like if it bumped until the post were locked as the goal was met or something?
Due to the particulars of the Active sort algorithm, bumping stops being very effective sometime before 12 hours after the post is made, which a bot would not counteract.
That said, I have long been planning to put together a basic bumper-bot that would, upon being triggered in a thread, reply every 10 to 30 mins (not sure what the optimal frequency is) to keep the thread bumped for a certain amount of time (also not entirely sure on this number, but overall duration would be at least a few hours).
This doesn’t keep threads around longer than they can last now, but will be more consistent than human bumpers, and will allow mods to ban the other bots from the comm, since their instant replies don’t really affect the ranking at all (it’s based on the timestamp of the most recent comment, nothing else).
Ah I see, thanks for the explanation! If there was a “one post per day” rule I could see that being pretty helpful, especially since it is more effective than the existing bump bots
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
No, users’ needs will often vary; limits like this will cause problems.
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
This may make sense, but the Active sort definitely incentivizes posts every 6 to 8 hours instead, and I don’t see an easy way around that, unfortunately. I defer to others’ opinions on this one.
do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
On the one hand this sounds like a decent system; on the other hand the potential for abuse does exist. But if people want to try it out, and mods are okay with doing their part, I’d be willing to participate.
do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
Not really, it kinda seems pedantic to me.
do you think we should allow meta posts?
Yes; otherwise there is no way to criticize bad actors, and I am of the opinion that the recent meta post, which I believe prompted this one, was valuable and helpful to the community.
Not gonna go into specifics, but Sphere’s opinion is definitely one of the more important opinions on this thread
IMO as someone who frequents the mutual_aid community when I can, we should not be policing posters there with respect to how much they’ve received or how much they can ask for. A consequence of this being an anonymous online community is that there’s no way to know whether someone is being honest, and that is something we should just accept. Others have said this, and I agree with it: if you want to know you’re helping someone who needs it, join a local org.
Potentially a limit to the number of posts could be helpful. However, I understand why people desperate for help would make posts in a short period of time. I would leave that one to people in the comm who need help.
Meta posts calling out other users feels too much like a witch hunt and I believe it’s unproductive (for the reasons mentioned in paragraph 1). I feel like mods should handle grievances like that if we choose to handle it at all.
- do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
No
- do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
Yes, I think once a day or every other day is fine, multiple times a day is too much and I feel like it drowns out other requestors
- do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
Yes, words mean things.
- do you think we should allow meta posts?
No, if this means posts within the comm about issues like this. It seems to just cause a lot of tension and regardless of how I might feel about what goes on in this particular comm, the passive aggressiveness that has been prevalent on this site more recently feels terrible. I can’t imagine how it must feel for the people who are being called out, either.
IF meta posts were to stay I think they shouod be strictly moderated and there would need to be ground rules for participation. The personal attacks are outta control
This is my reply to the dm, which I’m also going to post here.
Are you happy with the community as it currently is?
No. It isn’t very effective at getting aid.
users can post 3 times a week, asks no more than 100$ each post
3 times a week is too few and $100 ain’t shit. If there’s to be a money limit, it needs to be much higher.
display name is changed to “emergency aid”
No opinion.
users communicate if they are open to non monetary resources (local aid groups, etc.)
Good idea. Only if the user communicates it. No unsolicited offers, because 9 times out of 10 they probably won’t help.
user requests aid, amount requested in title using [$0/$x] format
I usually do this anyway. I think it’s a good idea.
users donate and report the post with the amount donated, mods note it or report it with a message indicating they donated so a mod can comment
Potentially good idea, but unless they provide receipts I don’t think this would work out. What’s to stop someone claiming to have donated to make others think the need is already met when it hasn’t been?
user updates title with amount received and the thread is locked when the goal is met
Good idea.
meta posts are no longer permitted
Bad idea. There needs to be mechanisms for community discussion.
Just woke up, might have more thoughts later.
tldr: NO
Im still failing to see a problem with how things are currently run. can i get more info without calling anyone out? i read thru these replies and im pretty confused about this and why things even need to change.
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
how tf are we equipped to know what constitutes a proper limit?do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
how would this even help? what problem is this addressing? are people upset about scrolling by requests? those people need to just block the comm.If we’re bound and determined to “fix” the issue for comrades who just can’t stand to see people asking for money, maybe a major format change could be something like a featured megathread instead? i don’t even like that idea at all, I’m sure that idea has a major downsides but i still think it’s better than trying to limit posts.
do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
that seems like an awful lot of work for the mods. i don’t want my donations tracked either.Furthermore, what is the endpoint of this accounting, besides eventually questioning aid receivers on the “proper use” of funds received?
do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
i hate semantics, hate hate hate hate hate them.
do you think we should allow meta posts?
“meta” as in users attacking or questioning aid receivers, like hella super
“meta” posts as in like…directing donators and requesters to aid programs, yes!
Sticky, sidebar something that might help people get aid they didn’t know was available, or help donators wantin to direct their funds to more accountable, established aid programs might be nice.
gotta be
alla these ideas just seem like means testing with different coats of paint.Are people donating really upset about their donations not “doing what they should”? I… really think those folks need to take a deep breath and reevaluate what it means to give.
What funds spared will not prevent people needing money again; no matter how we wish it were different. No matter how “well” the receiver spends it. Offering a donation —no matter how high— is never enough payment towards the right to judge how well it is spent.
Those who want to arbitrate “proper” use of donated money should either donate to an org, or put their money where their mouth is, and post their budgets!
Then they should sit on their hands and listen, contrite, as their comrades explain sanctimoniously how their spending could be better directed towards more mutual_aid.
You might not like semantics but “mutual aid” has a meaning and key to that meaning is “mutual aid is not charity” (hence it bring mutual). Right now the mutual aid comm doesn’t really function like that, and personally I don’t think there’s way its set up could ever function as proper mutual aid - which is fine but if you’ve ever done real life mutual aid work it doesn’t look like people asking for cash donations and some cadre giving them. Like semantics or don’t, that’s the motivation.
People tend to get attached to mutual aid as a name because it’s a cool horizontalist leftist thing to do, but we don’t enact that stuff and just take the name.
THANK YOU. A bunch of people are saying that it’s just semantics, but words mean things. In the social services field, the terms “mutual aid”, “harm reduction”, “peer support” among others are being coopted and bastardized and quite frankly depoliticized for profit by the “non-profit industrial complex”. If this is supposed to be a community of leftists we SHOULD care about how these terms are applied. Or maybe I’m just being sensitive because of the work I do idk
Idk, I think the name still works. Right now I’m In a position where I occasionally ask for assistance, but I have an interview coming up that may change that and even allow me to give back to the community. Sometimes the mutuality just takes longer to kick in.
i see what you mean about “mutual” but if we get bogged down with semantics, even if we changed the name wouldnt we just as easily be arguing over what constitutes “emergency”? i guess we could talk about the proper meaning of ‘mutual aid’ but this is an online communist community, the current name falls closely enough to wikipedias entry which I’ll put up for all:
mutual aid
Mutual aid is an organizational model where voluntary, collaborative exchanges of resources and services for common benefit take place amongst community members to overcome social, economic, and political barriers to meeting common needs. This can include physical resources like food, clothing, or medicine, as well as services like breakfast programs or education. These groups are often built for the daily needs of their communities, but mutual aid groups are also found throughout relief efforts. Resources are shared unconditionally, contrasting this model from charity where conditions for gaining access to help are often set, such as means testing or grant stipulations. These groups often go beyond material or service exchange and are set up as a form of political participation in which people take responsibility for caring for one another and changing political conditions
Some of the things in that definition do not fit how this comm is run, youre right. i think that is natural, tho, limitations of the format, and if changes are really needed —probably my professed hatred of semantics makes it obv i don’t think they are— we should if anything strive to more closely meet the definition of mutual aid rather than force-fit the name to what it currently achieves.
real life experience, maybe relevant
I have recently gotten involved with a community farm/food pantry and been (perhaps this is my naivete showing) shocked to see some of the attitudes from the people involved casting judgement on those who line up to receive help. some attitudes of (imo) ‘buying right to judge’ prevail within the group.
one of the people donating their time (for years, mind you) expressed how upset they were by the difference in responses week-to-week, imagining the food we have to deliver wasn’t “good enough”, that there was a “hotline” (their term) of people calling each other to “stay away this time” or “call everyone, come n’ get it!” one week to the next, as sometimes we have steaks etc, and sometimes we only have vegetables or less ‘exciting’ things. i was just shocked by the attitude really. why would they care? what does it matter to them?
peeps who donate their time to the pantry get to pick out a box of food for themselves. i watched that ‘complainer’ set aside the best for themselves beforehand, biting my tongue, because hell, they’ve been offering their time for free for a decade and i don’t know what their circumstances are either. if i cared to soapbox there id judge them for judging others, but then id have to account for myself as well.
some users of the community feel that they have to make multiple posts to even be seen which makes other posts harder unless they also make multiple posts.
the point of accounting is to help posters to update their post with amount received and lock it when the need has been met so other posts can receive the aid
meta as in posts related to anything outside of posting asking for aid, comments bumping it or comments replying that they’ve send the aid which would include both posts detailing suspected scams as well as lists of non monetary aid
thank you for the explanation
of course thank you for speaking up at, after reading other commenter’s perspectives I have reached out to everyone that has used the community this month to get their feedback. we really do want to make the community as helpful and sustainable as possible for the people using it and really it seems that sticking with the current “Mods do not vet individual mutual aid requests. Donate at your own risk” is the best course of action and we will likely ban critical meta-posts of specific users going forward
What is the thinking behind no more than $100 per post? What if someone is in an emergency that needs more than that, or the refugees who advertise their gofundmes? I think this rule would screw many desperate people over. How does this work with people who use other currencies?
Also I don’t agree with having to request an amount in the title - I ask for food vouchers and will take whatever someone can give. I often have to make multiple posts before getting a response so i don’t want to be limited by how much I can ask for or I’ll end up with not enough to tide me over from last time while i wait for a response.
What are meta posts?
Why are all these changes wanted?
As far as keeping track, I’ve found (since i ask for food vouchers that can be donated anonymously) some people prefer to remain anonymous, so they probably wouldn’t report anyway. Also very dangerous - for instance, I got trolled on lemmy by someone who kept saying (for weeks) they would send aid but didn’t. He got banned. But people like him want to make life worse for people who need help. They would anonymously report to the mods that they had sent us money, when they actually hadn’t.
Weekly limit on amount of posts - this would prevent people from getting the help they need. It took me about 4 posts to get the help I need this time. I had nowhere else to turn.
All in all I think these changes will remove the only lifeline left for some desperate people.
The only change I want to see is the ability to reply in-thread removed. I, and several other people here, have had people comment in our threads saying they’re going to help, and then they don’t help. Other people see their reply, think we’ve already been helped and then don’t offer any help. It costs us help we would have had from other people.
users donate and report the post with the amount donated, mods note it or report it with a message indicating they donated so a mod can comment
i think this could be used for potential harm to user’s aid posts. i remember c/mutual_aid users mentioning an issue of people not following through with aid after messaging for their details. what would happen if someone reports that they sent funds to a user when they actually didn’t? would confirmation default to the person receiving aid?
do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
i don’t think mods should but i don’t have an alternative that i can think of right now to fully answer this question.
With this proposed system people who say they sent funds and don’t will first be warned and then sitebanned.
How can you verify they did send them?
If its just asking the recipient to verify wouldnt it just be he said she said?
If someone repeatedly comments on the post to say they donated and the recipient says they didn’t get it we would take action. in the event of a user reporting the post with something to the effect of “i’d like to donate to this please notify” then we can do the same thing.
You are correct that at the end of the day it is he said she said but we would establish matrix communication for the sending of proof
we would establish matrix communication for the sending of proof
I hate to say it but fabricating screenshots is so easy that I struggle to believe such a system could work if used in bad faith by even one person
I hate to say it but fabricating screenshots is so easy
to demonstrate:
:carrot:please pet my nose tho
that’s true but I hope that both users pledging to donate and those asking for money would be engaging with the site in good-faith
I just don’t think, especially with money at stake, that it’s reasonable to hope that every single user who ever uses the comm will do so in good faith, or be obvious enough in their bad faith to be sussed out. And even one person with an axe to grind could potentially get someone banned with fabricated evidence. I think we have to build systems that are resilient to abuse where possible and the strong possibility of disciplining a user in need of help feels worse to me than allowing someone to collect donos and not update the post to reflect them. I guess you could say that any mod action being taken requires multiple reports from established accounts showing a pattern of behavior, not just one and done. That would help.
but frankly sending screenshots back and forth offsite also overcomplicates the process of both donating and receiving donations. It just doesn’t feel like a well fleshed out plan to me
the incentive to dispute that a donation occurred is the limit. if there’s no arbitrary limit per post/week imposed, then both parties can engage in good faith
input for all of these changes should prioritize c/mutual_aid users thoughts first and foremost. from what i’ve gathered reading this thread, most of these proposed changes are from users who don’t interact with c/mutual_aid or are themselves donors. this is not prioritizing the community members most impacted by these changes and instead they’re being ignored, combatted, or scared shitless by these potential changes. these changes have very real and potentially dire consequences for these users. all this doesn’t feel right at all.
some of the suggestions were from private messages from people receiving donations feeling that the current state of the community is not healthy. you are correct about the changes if any should priotritize the community members that would be most impacted. I will reach out privately to those people to see what they think should happen. Do you think that we should keep meta-posts?
reaching out to them all privately would be good. to answer your question, with how the meta-posting has gone in this thread, i personally think we shouldn’t keep meta-posts as too much harm can come from them.
i sent messages to the people who posted there this month and we will weigh their opinions on the community much more heavily than others
-
users can post 3 times a week, asks no more than 100$ each post –Imagine walking up to someone homeless and desperate on the street holding a sign that reads “homeless and hungry anything helps” and saying “You’ve been here every day this week, you can’t get anymore aid, you need to leave.” That’s what this reads like. Limit posts to once a day if you really want to regulate the comm this much, but let the people giving decide the amount. Change the format to require labels like “need for long-term” or something but this just feels like overstepping and a good way to further alienate people who can and want to give more.
-
display name is changed to “emergency aid” –pedantic and unnecessary, just avoid the struggle session and keep the comm as it is with the added weekly advice/non-monetary aid posts or something
-
users communicate if they are open to non monetary resources (local aid groups, etc.) –people should ask in the comments before offering advice, the posters shouldn’t have to add this, it should be a given that unless explicitly asked commenters should just shut the fuck up and move on or wait for a thread where advice is meant to be posted
-
user requests aid, amount requested in title using [$0/$x] format –this is fine but it has the potential for alienating those who can only give a small amount or stopping those who could give more from doing so when it should be up to the person giving how much they want to contribute, it’s none of the community’s business how much is being given
-
users donate and report the post with the amount donated, mods note it or report it with a message indicating they donated so a mod can comment –it’s none of the community’s business how much is being given, have the OP update the post title and say thanks or if they’re good or not or lock it after 72hrs or something, this just feels like such a huge overstep
-
user updates title with amount received and the thread is locked when the goal is met –it’s none of the community’s business how much is being given, see previous answer
-
meta posts are no longer permitted –it’s on the mods to determine if this is worth it, but changing a single community rule could address the reason this was brought up
-
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested? No.
-
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts? Daily, yes, weekly no.
-
do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating? Absolutely not.
-
do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid? No.
-
do you think we should allow meta posts? I don’t think they’re happening enough to warrant this.
-
Setting a limit is pointless as it’s all voluntary anyway. I want people to be honest about their needs.
I think a posting limit is good as it will give a better overall view of people’s needs in the comm. Those needs don’t typically change throughout the week unless it’s an emergency
I don’t like the idea of this, it’s very micromanagey
Name is fine
No meta posts, it’s disgusting when people attack each others credibility here and it hurts both the accused and accusers. I don’t expect people to be 100% honest here, if they feel the need to lie in order to get fed I’m not going to hold them to the same moral standard I would hold someone who’s financially stable and well fed.
putting a hard limit on the amount seems like a bad idea. even if some people needing more money leads to other people not getting money (which i don’t believe is the case, i believe most donaters will try to donate to a variety of people), some people are just gonna need more money than other people, some people are in more desperate situations that require constant support and some people just need one-off support.
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
no
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
no
do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
no, because you have no way of actually confirming that they did donate
do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
yea
do you think we should allow meta posts?
idc
Mutual aid shouldn’t have any strings attached to it, nor should asking for it have any limits.
I personally think meta posts are fine. If someone is adamant that another is ‘scamming’ - go ahead and post that shit in a separate post from their mutual aid request.
users donate and report the post with the amount donated, mods note it or report it with a message indicating they donated so a mod can comment
dumb
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
- no there shouldn’t be any sort of limits or conditions on mutual aid.
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
- no there shouldn’t be any sort of limits or conditions on mutual aid.
do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
- no there shouldn’t be any sort of limits or conditions on mutual aid.
do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
- no there shouldn’t be any sort of limits or conditions on mutual aid.
do you think we should allow meta posts?
- yes, if someone wants to cry about another user - let them. I don’t understand what the point of this post/discussion is even about other than the ‘X poster is living in his relative’s driveway!!’ post from a few days ago.
didn’t we LITERALLY have this same discussion half a year ago when the same thing happened and decided to let meta posts be a thing but not let those people comment on the actual mutual aid post itself???
yes but the only time the right to make meta-posts was exercised resulted in a lot of people asking for it to be changed resulting in this check-in post
Fair. Sorry, I didn’t mean to come off as I was yelling at you (and realize my OP can be read like that).
Thank you for all you do!!Thank you for commenting!
No.
Maybe?
Yes.
No.
No.Hey I’m glad to see this situation getting attention but starting out the discussion post with
This post is to discuss the mutual aid community’s rule of allowing meta posts: mutual aid as a community, those making posts in it and those commenting on posts.
We are considering removing the exception allowing meta posts but wanted to involve the userbase before committing to a change.>
Please comment with any thoughts, feelings, or suggestions regarding this change.
and then turning around and saying “okay here’s a list of sweeping changes based on feedback” feels like a major shift. I didn’t post any generic suggestions about what to do with the comm because I thought the post was intended to be specifically about one rule changing
anyhow, of that list:
- No
- Yes.
- Lean no. Depends on how its implemented.
- Don’t care
- Yes
This includes various suggestions made by users and mods both on this post, others and the mod chat
my reading comprehension might just be bad on this tbf. I read it 3x before realizing the second half of that first quoted line I posted was opening up the floor to a broader discussion.
anyhow, I think slap-dash tracking of donos could easily end up worse than doing nothing. we don’t want to deanonymize people more than necessary, we don’t want the system to be exploitable for harassment of specific users or be hard to navigate.
similarly leaving no avenue for complaints seems bad. The (very uncommon, less than once a month) meta-posts attract so much attention because there are some genuine scams going on, not just because they’re bringing out reactionary sentiments (though there always seem to be at least one or two comments that go too far). And unless mods are going to police what is and isn’t a scam, social pressure and metaposts are the only outlet this stuff has. It’s a very thorny thing to balance but I’m glad we’re trying to improve it
Meta posts are obvious to spot, but what counts as a “meta comment”?
I responded in one of Bailey’s recent threads about the possibility of having small donations coordinated on a regular basis by a few people to cover nutrition/glucose. I’d been meaning to ask that for a while, but in full disclosure what fully prompted me to do it was ATTID’s meta post. Honestly if someone I knew online really needed fruit juice every 48 hours and had no way of affording it besides p2p donations, 10 people chipping in a dollar or two a month would cover it. Is that metaposting?
People have also mentioned non-monetary resources and how important they are. Does directing someone to non-monetary resources fall under Bad Wrong Moralizing Meta Posting, or is it fair game? What is the line between conversations about the MA (or supportive comments) and something that’s seen as derailing it or unwelcome?
Naturally, I gravitate to long-term solutions, and it should surprise no one that ceterum censeo commune Hexbeariana esse ædificandum.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I used to give pretty regularly but ended up blocking the comm once folks started doing rolling fundraisers for multiple hundreds per month. Just rubbed me the wrong way. There’s not a soul on this site who couldn’t use an extra few hundred for bills per month. I was more interested in helping folks out who were experiencing acute emergencies.
I feel like the current status quo of the comm is just demoralizing for all involved and I’m not really sure what could be done.
I can’t really speak for anyone seeking assistance, but as an outside observer it feels like people aren’t receiving as much help as they’d like or potentially could and I imagine it’s tiring having to make multiple posts a day with potentially little to show for it.
On the other end of things I think comrades looking to lend a hand can find it hard to know how best to do that. It’s hard to know sometimes who has already been helped and who is falling through the cracks. So I think it can be overwhelming for potential donators and unfortunately discourages people from doing so.
I can’t speak to the administrative or moderation side of things or what would be feasible, but I have some interest in trying to make the comm more effective for everyone involved.
Hopefully other people share their input in ways they think things could be improved.Idk if that’s the point of this thread or it’s just about meta stuff or whatever…
It’s really the main issue with the internet, lack of transparency. Anyone can easily make multiple accounts and also there’s no way to verify anything about any of it really. At least when I do direct aid locally I can tell that the person is in a bad way pretty quickly. No one on the streets here is faking it and it’s just not the case on the internet. I’d love to direct my resources to leftists where possible but I haven’t got a lot to spare so I’m probably going to focus on local direct aid.
What specific changes would you make?
We already ask that posters include if they have had their request met to help communicate who has been helped already.
Having moderators decide who is or isn’t a scammer shifts responsibility from the user wanting to donate to the moderator team which at this point violates the spirit of the community in so far as we as a mod try not to influence individual fundraising efforts.
You know what sucks is that for people complaining about scams or people soliciting for donations for food and then using it for drugs - like, hexbear anonymous donations aren’t as substitute for an org in that city or a food bank. We could at best cover a chunk of or entirerty of someone’s rent once or, ironically, pay for someone’s drugs a few times (why not, I like my own drugs like coffee and cigarettes and shit so why shouldn’t someone struggling with cash get them) or maybe help with groceries a couple times. But we could never replace a food bank or a shelter or training programs or whatever, because we’re an anonymous forum of mostly hard up for cash leftists.
There’s also not a lot of mutual aid in the mutual aid comm - the amount of mutuality depending on someone needing short term financial help and then getting their feet unser later. Theres aid in the mutual aid comm, the amount which notwithstanding, but how can someone asking for food every day actually do the mutual part of mutual aid on an online anonymous forum? There’s stuff they could actually do in person where they live but how would we direct that or have anything to do with that? Some of the stories people have also suggest they actually should stop trying to help the people around them and focus on their own survival - like maybe you can’t have a roommate living with you in your car cause it’s another mouth to feed. Or maybe you need to check in to an inpatient medical program if youre actually risking DKA and hypoglycemic events as often as the posts go up. There was one person who I recall in a, self disclosed, manic episode gave away a lot of their money to an ex or whatever and now couldn’t afford rent. Like, whatever the circumstances, you’re not in a position to be trying to help other people with money yet and so there’s not really a mutual element.
An actual mutual aid network isn’t just charity, like we’d ideally be organizing so that some frequent posters would be hooked into real programs that meet their actual needs - except we’re anonymous too lol. Like it’s a mess.
An actual mutual aid network isn’t just charity, like we’d ideally be organizing so that some frequent posters would be hooked into real programs that meet their actual needs - except we’re anonymous too lol. Like it’s a mess.
If this was how the comm worked, I know about hella resources for people experiencing homelessness in Portland, but I’ve been hesitant to reach out in these posts because it might be “meta” to offer something other than money.
I’ve still done so and I’m down to help anyone navigate these systems, but idk if anyone has followed up on any of it.
Same, I have worked in case management for years and am decent at finding resources and navigating them for people but that isn’t what’s being asked for and I get nervous about coming off rude or something if I throw suggestions out there.
Same. I also do social work and could probably assist in some way and depending on the country/system that can be very concrete stuff, but it isn’t money. I do donate here and there as well, but there are posts where I have felt like some advice could also help.
I do this advice thing for good food banks, right to benefits etc. in my local setting elsewhere and I think it would be pretty hard to implement on an anonymous forum like this with people from all over the world. But we could try.
I agree about the difficulty. I know in the US at least it could be starting macro, like national resources, then working down to state ones, or letting people DM us with location requests from a throwaway account or something.
I think providing other resources besides money is a good idea! Just the issue of doxxing people’s locations but could easily be DM’d instead
Maybe we should implement an exception to the rule against meta posting for people who make multiple requests, indicating more of a chronic need than an acute one?
This is something that concerns me and could come across as judgemental…
There’s a line between helping and enabling or exacerbating a problem. I’m not here to argue over what aid takes precedence but there’s a clear difference between someone who is hungry and someone who is experiencing a medical emergency and the aid part doesn’t necessarily always have to be money. Money isn’t always the best form of help for every problem and the unofficial vibe in the comm is that it is and it doesn’t matter what the people use it for if it helps even for a second. I’m not advocating for judging people’s situations but we should be aiming to help in the most effective way possible with our limited resources.
It doesn’t really feel like the mutual aid is very mutual. And alot of the people posting consistently on mutual aid don’t really seem to post or interact outside of the comm. I don’t really know too much about the situation but that’s just my two cents. Not sure if the comm is accomplishing what it set out to do.
Donations are anonymous, so you don’t know who is giving aid. I have helped people who have helped me before and vice versa, can’t really say who without making that help non-anonymous but we definitely help each other on that comm. Not everybody uses the comm right, but many of us give when we can and ask when we need.
Edit: I’ll add there’s a chance I lose my insurance this year because of a specific mutual aid action I took last year. There’s someone on here that’s donated a substantial amount to me over the years and we play video games and chat for hours sometimes (if they’re reading this, want you to know I just don’t have access to my Matrix right now, not ignoring you, I really miss our chats). I’ve made some really good relationships with people over that comm.
Here’s a dumb but honest question: what even is mutual aid, and how is it different from charity? Cause rn it looks like we are running a very disorganized charity for both regular community contributors, as well as people who use this site almost exclusively for the comm. Is the difference that the money goes straight to the recipient without any accountability or organization or records? Just wondering how this system is supposed to work.
I’ve wondered this as well, often out loud in posts/comments. The urge to call our charity mutual aid just to make it “leftist” is a bad one, IMO. But there are some minor differences at least in theory. The idea is that it’s a “pay it forward” kind of thing where we help eachother out when needed and then those people help others when they are able. But because of the realities of capitalist life I don’t see that happening all that often. The people with the stability to send money regularly to randos from the internet tend to stay the same and the people with serious needs tend to stay the same. I think the only real difference in practice is that much of our donations goes to known community members, not random strangers. Does that make it mutual aid? idk, not really probably, but I appreciate it whatever we call it.
I think about this in on the ground work as well. Many many orgs call their work mutual aid when its really just charity. But it feels very hard to ask anything of people who are destitute, even if involving them in the work sustaining them could be liberatory
You could argue that what this community is usually doing isn’t actually mutual aid. Mutual aid in most socialist theory says that help should never be a one way street, you should help e.g. house a homeless person but the homeless person should also help the organization keep afloat by helping cut costs or operate in whatever way is within their means. Our loose housing group obviously practices mutual aid, for example, some of the homeless people help cook homemade meals for the houses they’re in to help reduce food costs or they help maintain a garden.
I personally think that a homeless person having direct access to donors is better than a traditional charity. In some cases, this does not make sense (e.g. someone needs a very secure way of receiving funds due to threats to their life, many refugee organizations fall into this category and require security people on the payroll to safely help people). Charities are often middlemen that means test applicants for aid and pay out their board members with hundreds of thousands of dollars of cash, in many cases its a racket that uses donations to fund propaganda about how good these sorts of organizations are. Imagine if those hundreds of thousands of dollars were going to people that desperately needed it.
it looks like we are running a very disorganized charity
Agreed it isn’t mutual aid right now it’s a charitable donation request form that works in the most obscure way possible. A real charity would do work to assess needs and ensure that resources went to those that require it most and to ensure a fair distribution, not just based on who posts most and has the most BUMP comments and bot triggers. I’m not presently sure it works how it should at all and I’m not sure Lemmy is the place for it due to the softwares design as a link aggregator.
As a trans refugee living in a camp, I rely on communities like this to survive emotionally and materially. When I post for help, I’m not just fighting poverty, I’m fighting invisibility.
Removing meta posts that question or critique mutual aid requests is vital. Every time someone casts doubt or makes “meta” judgments, it makes people like me feel small, like we have to prove our pain or our worth.
This space should be about solidarity, not suspicion. Please protect it, so people like me can ask for help with dignity without shame or fear.
In case this feedback is relevant, the comm has been abused by certain members spamming posts multiple times per day every day, so I blocked it 🤷
Is that an abuse? or just a consequence of the format making it so posts get easily drowned out?
I don’t think those desperate to have basic needs met is on the same level as having to scroll past posts if this is supposedly a space inhabited by leftists that care about marginalized people. As someone who’s experienced homelessness I can understand not wanting to get to that point because it becomes exponentially harder to leave it once you’re there.
Yeah. When I post multiple times a day, it’s because I really need help and nobody is…helping me.
That’s because people have seen you recieve thousands of dollars and multiple vehicles and have seen you post how bad you need necessities, recieve money, and then post about the sweet new bong you bought to go with all the awesome drugs you just got.
For an outside observer if they have limited resources and it’s between somebody you don’t know anything about and somebody you’ve seen squander money they got under false pretenses the decisions pretty obvious.
I’ve kept my mouth shut about this for months to not cause any trouble but I can not believe you are the one saying the comm has a problem with people sucking the air out of the room and scamming.
Gotta be honest this is a you issue and it’s incredibly shitty. You’re combining the 2 incredibly fun tropes of “noble poor” and “the worst thing about poverty is that I have to see it”.
People asking for help don’t actually owe it to you to prove that they’re min/maxing money that you gave them. There is no amount of money that you could realistically receive from posting on mutual_aid to bootstrap your way back to financial independence. It’s all survival money. Survival isn’t just coping with your hunger or exposure. It’s also about coping with your feelings. Being homeless and impoverished is an incredibly lonely, dreadful and long existence. It’s an experience filled with anguish, self abasement, and uncertainty. Using drugs to survive that isn’t some moral failing, because raw-dogging such an existence is not a moral virtue.
By criticizing the purchase of drugs you are supposing that theru’s a utility cost to that money that would fix the root causes. By conditioning aid on sobriety, you are demanding that people impoverished people should actively suffer. By complaining about the visibility of cries for help you are demanding that impoverished people should suffer in silence.
Your meager help is contingent on imposing harm because you cannot rid yourself of the ego and moral judgements when interacting with the most vulnerable members of society. You actively are showing your ass that you think poor people are inherently bad and must act a certain way to regain their “goodness”. Nobody owes you atrocity porn to sate your own negative feelings about the ideas you hold.
Charity cannot be wasted because charity is a social relationship, it’s not a measure of marginal utility. Charity can only be abused through deceit, but that’s not what your criticizing. If you don’t want to give money to people who will spend it on drugs that’s your business, but don’t pretend that there’s some universal logic around the way people should act because of your personal feelings.
As I said last time this all came up I have no problem with people spending donated money on whatever they want as long as they didn’t lie to get it.
I don’t care if people spend it on drugs or anything else, as long as they didn’t say it was for something else.
Saying you need money for basic survival items, getting the money and then turning around and spending it on drugs is shitty, especially when it’s surrounded by posts of other people also saying rhe need survival necessities.
I don’t think I’m the only one who, given the option to donate limited resources to people starving in Gaza or facing eviction or having that same money go to somebody buying gard drugs, I’d rather it be used on the thing that is going to actually improve the situation.
Especially if you’re then going to go on to say that other people are making outside observers less likely to donate.
That’s before you get into the history of bragging about scamming people and calling people slurs when you get called on it.
deleted by creator
. I was facing homelessness and begged for cash on mutualaid and I watched as someone asked for money for a vehicle and received $4,000. Then they bought drugs with it.
what the fuck. $4,000? WHAT THE FUCK THAT COULDVE DONE SO MUCH GOOD.
Please tell me that at least that user was banned
Yea i normally wouldn’t have said anything if that exact person wasn’t the one complaining about other people dping that now.
I did not blow it all on drugs. Hell, I spent at least a quarter of that, in other words a whole entire rack, on other people in need. In other words, giving it away to my homeless friends. I sent one friend alone $400. I sent $200 to another.
I’m not saying I didn’t buy drugs with it. But it was not even a quarter of that $4K.
You know what I did blow it on? DoorDash. I spent maybe $1,000 on DoorDash.
I’m ashamed of how I squandered that money either way and I’ve learned from my mistakes but I know nobody fucking cares so why the fuck should I bother.
That is disturbing to read, I’m sorry you went through that and I hope you’re at least okay now.
I feel like there could be more emphasis on a hierarchy of needs in this comm but idk how to implement that without opening the cans of worms that come from basically means testing. That would go against the purpose of the comm. But maybe at least some feedback system that allows people who want to donate to understand whose requests are being ignored or whose requests still need to be fulfilled.
I think from the perspective of competing needs the more likely issue is that some people get more because they are more popular / appealing than others which is another form of market logic of its own. I think that’s a fair criticism, but it’s still a criticism of those who choose the allocation of resources rather than a criticism of those who need them.
My point is that being the arbiter of competing needs on a person to person basis is morally fraught (and typically on some level dishonest) which is why real mutual aid is a communal and social function rather than a peer-to-peer market function. Also that enforcing a system of account on those who are in need is just opening up a can of worms for petty sectarian moralizing that is going to wind up with harming more people than preventing scenarios like this.
There’s also just a lot of unverified, unknowable information to make a call here, and digging thru the post and user histories that started this thread it’s incredibly difficult to tell what the truth of the obvious off board drama between the involved users is.
FWIW you shouldn’t have gone homeless, that’s a failing of society on multiple levels that should be eradicated.
I don’t think I’m the only one who, given the option to donate limited resources to people starving in Gaza or facing eviction or having that same money go to somebody buying gard drugs, I’d rather it be used on the thing that is going to actually improve the situation.
Sure, but you also have to be honest with yourself that this is about your ego and wanting to maximize the good that YOU do according to YOUR beliefs. I also doubt that this same calculus applies if the person who might be spending money on drugs is more closely related to you rather than some person on the internet.
This isn’t some self evident logical principle, this is a reaction to your own feelings and ideas. Mutual aid is not about purchasing the most “alleviation” or “goodness”. You’re exhibiting the same form of thinking that calls things like breakfast programs frivolous luxury. The comm is called mutual aid because mutual aid is unconditional. You’re attempting to make personal a normative value judgement objective rather than what it is, subjective.
Someone is saying, I have a problem and I need help. You are saying, there’s plenty of people with problems in the market so I’m only going to help if I like the way you solve your problem. That’s not charity or mutual aid, that’s an investment.
No that’s total fucking cope lol.
Me saying that I would rather my limited money for charity go to feeding somebody in need rather than someone using it for recreational drugs is not a sign that I have an ego problem.
hear hear
There’s not really a need for that, here and now in particular
Then where?
I feel like there are a handful of users who have to bite their tongue while another handful of users don’t have to. It’s not like this stuff isn’t done out in the open. The user in question comes on here and posts about it! I’ve never seen them over in self crit either…
At the time this was more about soliciting advice on how to go ahead with the comm as a whole lol, which didn’t feel appropriate. But at this point we have all the drama aired out here anyway so whatever
I get that but it seems like a popular topic that a lot of people are afraid to discuss. I’m not even trying to take sides right now but I feel like sparing the feelings of one person at the expense of the people trying to help isn’t a good strategy. There are a lot of people ITT that said they blocked the comm for the drama and that sucks for a lot of reasons.
We should be able to trust our users to talk about sensitive community issues and mod anyone that gets out of pocket. It’s toxic to just bottle it up and wait for the next person to explode. Then everyone is like “what is @Longstanding_user_who_contributes problem?” Instead of looking at the whole issue.
Multiple vehicles? Lol.
bongs are really cheap
This one was not.
You have absolutely no idea how much it cost
Is this dialectics?
I think meta posts being allowed is good. There should be a way to make suggestions and such and meta posts allow that
I think there should be a one post a day rule. I’ve personally needed help and never posted because the current meta is to drown each other out. It makes an already stressful thing to do feel adversarial, and I don’t want to be pushing other people down.
As for if there’s people scamming? Of course there are this is the internet. Not much to be done about that without also potentially harming someone in need.
This community’s existence is literally the very reason why I’ve been able to keep being alive. At times, I’ve been able to receive assistance from less anonymous sources, but Hexbear is the place that truly kept me going considering the amount of support I’ve gotten here.
This isn’t an exaggeration—if I look back on my life for as long as I’ve been in these shitty circumstances and reimagine me navigating them without c/mutual_aid, it’s a very nerve-wracking hypothetical to ponder. I most likely would’ve been dead soon enough.
Skepticism is certainly expected, but I feel like the desire to weed out scammers or disingenuous people is seeming so strong through this struggle that people are myopically forgetting to consider what some hard restrictions on this community would actually entail for the state of some of our lives.
I hate that I have to rely on c/mutual_aid to literally survive; that brief period where I actually had a job and didn’t have to use this community as a recipient (and could even use it as a donor) was the happiest time period I can recall while being through this whole mess. And then, without an iota of transparency, that job chops me, but after trying to find work since then, even at the least demanding (in terms of requirements) workplaces, I realized the ride will continue to be a long, bumpy one. I hate working with animal products, but I went as far to apply to places like McDonald’s and KFC, and I still couldn’t get hired.
Being Black and transfem led me to this hell, but something I’ve always picked up on from people is that they might do something like put #blacktranslivesmatter in their bio but not actually understand just how harsh it can be to live this way, especially if you are in a reactionary region, as I do. And, as I can see, I’m not the only person who is saying these sort of things.
I don’t know what else to say other than I hope we come to a reasonable solution here. This anxiety is far from what I need right now, so I’m going to try not to read these comments too much.
I don’t see how it’s possible to run a mutual aid comm with anonymous people scattered all over the world. Mutual aid really requires a much closer knit network of people working together in tangible non-monetary ways. I’ve done a little mutual aid offline, and mostly it’s the combination of a plan and people giving the right aid and advice to advance that plan that really changes people’s situation.
What we have is a charity comm. If we’re going to run a charity comm some regulation would help.
-
Limiting posts to one per week, or month, per account to stop the competition for visibility and subsequent blocking of the comm by people overwhelmed by the number of similar or repeated posts. Hexbear is not a large community, and many people are now blocking the comm because it makes them feel uneasy.
-
Enforcing the use of an external tracking tool like GoFundMe so people can be confident when targets are or aren’t met for a given post. It also provides a little bit of legitimacy and makes donations easier for many people who would be considering it.
-
Allowing people to provide suggestions for local support such as specific food banks or shelters: things that may reduce weekly repeats on the charity comm. Allowing people to suggest alternative purchases or actions, such as a more cost efficient alternative could be useful.
Regardless of moral judgements, donators need confidence in the system for the comm to function. Otherwise it’s just a drama generator that fosters contempt and mistrust while also leaving people feeling abandoned. A couple of incidents have really blown peoples trust, and left them fatigued. The situation is not going to change unless adjustments are made. As for discussions about the validity of a users cause - evidently, even when discussion of causes is forbidden, people still seethe and it still seeps into and erupts throughout the whole instance. The amount of recurring drama from one incident alone that is taboo to talk about is enough indication that simply banning discussions isn’t actually helping much, if at all.
This is where I am and I also feel what @iByteABit@hexbear.net has commented with below.
I am a person who can, at times, donate to people in need. But, at a point when it became overwhelming, I had to block the comm (and feel like shit for doing so) and prioritize in-person, local donations over the mutual aid comm. Here is my reasoning for what it is worth:
-The frustration of seeing people shouting over people who clearly need the financial assistance more. This is not to say people cannot ask for help without being in extreme danger, in fact, I don’t want to imply that at all. The people “shouting” began to prey upon empathetic posters with guilt-trip, ALL CAPS, calls to action based on dubious urgency. They would aim to eclipse other members who contribute more to the site, who are less sensationalist, and I’d argue more at-risk. Can I prove any of this? Nah, of course not. But, any decent comrade shouldn’t be trying to drown out his other comrades in need and they assuredly shouldn’t resort to emotional manipulation to do so. We’re all
socialistsliberals here, we’re empathetic to a fault. There is no need to emotionally manipulate in order to be heard. Just tell us what you need and be respectful to your fellow comrades with your posting-etiquette. For this reason, I am in favor of limiting the intervals that members can ask for donations with new posts/threads. Bumping or whatever can occur within a mega thread or something. Updates on the situation should occur from the poster in the thread that already exists, otherwise. Spamming the comm with bump threads is just spam that, as others have stated, leads to an emotional-manipulation arms race that ultimately causes high-empathy, generous comrades to get overwhelmed and block the comm. It is my belief that a socialist legitimately in need would not resort to these tactics to begin with and so I am highly skeptical that the posts I’m referring to aren’t just some fascist ass-clown abusing goodwill as a hobby and directly harming legitimate comrades in the process.-The frustration of not being able to reliably, anonymously donate to the people I want to help. Many times when I attempted to help, the medium with which assistance was requested either failed to process because the institution itself thought I was being scammed and blocked in a paternalistic manner from the recipient or I became sketched out by the platform I was being asked to use. I don’t intend to dox myself when I want to help people and I don’t want to have comrades in need feel unheard because they are using platforms that don’t allow for international/anonymous donations. For this reason I am in favor of a mod-sanctioned and organized method to reliably donate to the people in need of assistance.
-The frustration of seeing the communities limited resources be essentially on retainer for just a few charismatic members. Asking for an indefinite subsidy can only serve to limit available resources for comrades experiencing unexpected emergencies. I realize that this line of thought may lead to dubious, theatrical “emergencies” becoming widespread in an effort to “compete” for the communities resources; this is why there needs to be moderation that curtails such emotional manipulations. For this reason I am in favor of anyone seeking indefinite subsidy to be required to set up a patreon or GoFundMe for some basic transparency to protect other comrades in need. In this golden-age of scamming - I really fail to see why using a payment platform is undesirable for both people in need of help and those seeking to help. The concept of “anonymous charity on the internet” is painful naivety.
I fully agree with all of these ideas.
Lemmy is not the right platform to host something like this, especially in an instance that’s almost exclusively working class.
There are dedicated platforms for charity that do it better than this one ever will, the most Hexbear can do is to share each charity goal, especially in cases where someone needs immediate and urgent help.
Having a small posting limit shouldn’t hurt anyone that’s not spamming on purpose, you don’t need to be posting multiple times a day to get help, you are just overshadowing other people who also need help.
When I have the ability to give a bit of my money to someone here, it’s completely logical that I want that money to go the one that needs it most. Steps need to be taken to distribute our help better, that means we should know when a goal has been reached, and we should make sure that everyone is heard when they ask for that help.
The last point is also very important, there are several cases of people who obviously need guidance and other forms of help more urgently than they need financial help. That’s why helping someone find direct and real life help from organisations that exist for this reason can be life saving even.
All in all this community has achieved some great things over time, and some comrades can manage to get over rough patches and difficult situations partly thanks to it. It’s a good thing it exists despite the many difficulties of making such a thing work on a leftist anonymous site with people all around the world who don’t know one another at all. But it should be improved to try to overcome some of these challenges and make it more effective and impactful.
I’m OOL, what happened? Am I even allowed to ask? lol
Edit: nevermind I think I pieced it together
the inciting incident for this post was a meta-post recently but the history goes back years. its messy.
-
