# Is a thread discussing the most cost-effective way to donate to a political cause allowed? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [November 12, 2023, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-thread-discussing-the-most-cost-effective-way-to-donate-to-a-political-cause-allowed/993026 "2023-11-12T16:12:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 9
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2023, 6:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-thread-discussing-the-most-cost-effective-way-to-donate-to-a-political-cause-allowed/993026/9 "2023-11-13T06:11:38Z")
> [@What\_Exit](#): > > Avoiding calls for actions and direct links are important. Obeying the rules and mod instructions are important. Beyond that, I had to search the archives to figure out why avoiding calls for actions etc were important to the board. On 7/10/22 Ed rescinded the ban on calls for action, while maintaining guidelines against advocacy of harassment, violence or lawbreaking. > [@Clarification of SDMB rule against calls to action](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/clarification-of-sdmb-rule-against-calls-to-action/967571/42): > > On further consideration, based on comments received plus internal discussion, the SDMB staff has decided to rescind the rule against calls to action, which was unenforceably broad. Political advocacy and other calls to action are permitted on this board, subject to the rules below, most of which are restatements of our current practice. To clarify the procedure, we’re not taking a vote, but if questions are raised for which we don’t have a good answer - which was the case with the first iterati… Lawsuits are one overriding concern of the board. Two others were listed in that thread: > Ordinary political advocacy is fine. What we’re trying to avoid is people using the board to cook up mischief. A rule against harassment may be sufficient. We’re giving it some more thought. > Financial appeals have always required prior approval, for fear of scams. We usually grant it. I opine that something like this should be acceptable: “Those who care about X, should favor charity Y over charity Z for these reasons.” I’m wondering about this: “The fate of the world is at stake. Everyone should care about [[my issue]]. So dig deep, dig hard, suspend intellect, and respond generously to emotional appeals. Just 25 cents a minute can make a huge difference for round-eyed puppies.” In light of fear of scams, this one seems problematic without clear disclaimers. > Want to support the environment? Here’s a list of great charities I found online: > Sierra Club > National Resources Defense Council > LineMyPockets. com > League of Conservation Voters > Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility > Wikipedia Foundation That said, presumably one goal of the OP would be to identify dubious political organizations, which definitely exist. It would be odd to prohibit this sort of discussion in the off chance that ill conceived posts could inadvertently prop inefficient organizations. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-thread-discussing-the-most-cost-effective-way-to-donate-to-a-political-cause-allowed/993026)._