The following rule changes are presented for comment. The first has been the de facto rule for many years but through oversight was never included in the registration agreement/TOS:
English language. All SDMB posts should use the English language. We do not have the resources to moderate posts in other languages. We make common-sense exceptions for help with translation, explanation of foreign language words or expressions, foreign words or phrases that have come into common English usage, etc.
The following rule has been modified to prohibit political fundraising. We’ve decided we’re just not comfortable with this.
Fundraising appeals. Do not post fundraising appeals for any purpose, including but not limited to charities or other ostensibly good causes, without prior permission from staff. We do not allow fundraising for political candidates or campaigns, and are leery of appeals that could be construed as taking sides in controversial matters. When reviewing fundraising appeals, we try to be reasonably diligent but don’t have the resources for thorough investigation. Contribute at your own risk.
These rules will be posted to the terms of service following due consideration of comments.
I would definitely need a lot more information about why this would need to be done.
This is an often political board with participants who are politically active. These are people who sometimes want to engage in political activism. A blanket ban would seem an overly broad choice.
Furthermore, these are perilous political times, where people are genuinely concerned. Where bad things can happen to our country if people don’t contribute. We’re not in those times where politics can be dismissed as irrelevant.
I’d want to know what problem this is designed to prevent, since mods already have full discretion on what fundraisers can and can’t be allowed. Thus any problematic political fundraiser could be prevented, without ruling out the possibility of such entirely.
It’s not like anyone who sees it would be in any way obligated to support it. Literally no one would know who supported it, in fact.
I can understand that the board does not need to be cluttered with smaller, local fundraising requests, that makes sense on a number of levels.
Political fundraising is another thing. In the current political scene support really matters, and it matters globally. I don’t see how SDMB can get itself in trouble if they allow fundraising equally across parties. Set limits, yes. One post per poster every X months or whatever, and guidelines as to the text within that request.
This is a politically-minded board. I see nothing wrong with expanding that to fundraising within the limits of current board rules for civility etc.
No problem with the first, though I’d like, for clarification’s sake, if a remark I made recently about meeting Vladimir Putin ("Dobroye utro [good morning], Vladimir Vladimirovich ") would pass muster. I did translate “good morning,” but would I have to translate Mr. Putin’s patronymic, and explain why I didn’t call him “Mr. Putin”?
On the second, I have no problems with a general appeal to an inoffensive charity, such as “Donate to your local animal shelter,” or “Donate to your local hospital,” or similar. I imagine that the mods do not either. Though I do understand that specific appeals, such as “Donate to the ‘Aspen Creek Pet Hospital’” would be inappropriate. It would seem to me that any kind of appeal should be bounced off the mods first, just to make sure.
However, when it comes to politics, I don’t want to see appeals. At all.
I’ve seen a couple posts saying “I just made a difference by donating to ActBlue,” which is a Democratic fundraiser thing. Didn’t report any of them because it doesn’t bother me. I’m reading a thread in P&E about how well Democrats are going about their business, and I see the post. Big whoop?
But if for some reason the powers that be want to be even-handed to the zero Trump supporting members that legitimately want to solicit donations to Republican campaigns here of all places…
Or, they want to be able to avoid solicitations to Republican campaigns, without even the suggestion that the politics of the mods/admins doing the rejecting is the determining factor.
Saying please contribute to ActBlue or WinRed is not currently allowed and won’t be allowed under the clarification rule if I understand it correctly. But saying ‘I contributed to ActBlue or WinRed’ is probably fine. @Ed_Zotti will probably clarify that.
Linking to an iffy or temporary fundraising site is very strongly discouraged and will cause issues. The Temporary one can be possible with prior permission though requested of the @moderators group.
Well established 501c3 that are recognized by the IRS as legit probably won’t be an issue for Hurricane Relief and the like. But a FundMe even for a board member still needs permission first.
It sounds like we won’t approve any solicitation for funds for Political purposes. That does put the staff in an odd position anyway.
No. This kind of thing falls under the heading of common-sense exceptions. We would expect you to provide an accurate translation of unfamiliar foreign terms, and would be unhappy if you were to play games with us in that regard - e.g., the Russian expression you cite actually translates as “go eff yourself.” Not that we would necessarily object to your expressing this sentiment, just that we don’t want to be in the dark about what you’re saying.
Here’s the rationale for the fundraising rule change:
The primary mission of the SDMB is promoting discussion and debate, not fundraising. We explicitly allow political advocacy, including calls to action. If you want to persuade people to attend a rally for your favorite candidate, have at it.
Fundraising is another matter. A major problem is distinguishing legitimate appeals from scams. A number of online resources are available to help us vet charities and such, but this is easiest with established groups having a track record. Political fundraising efforts often have little history and involve entities we know nothing about. We’re not set up to investigate these things.
If you want to contribute to a political campaign, the SDMB is hardly your only resource. An online search will generally turn up an abundance of places willing to accept your money. You don’t need us for that purpose. In contrast, online forums where all sides can make their case are rare. That’s what we provide, and where we’d rather invest our time and effort.
Indeed, that’s probably fine. But we didn’t game out every hypothetical, and I don’t want to do so now. Let’s see how things go. If it becomes apparent the rule needs further clarification, we can take that up when the time comes.
Such an appeal doesn’t require us to vet anything, so sure, it’s fine. I can see where we may want to add some qualifying language along those lines to the revised rule.
In the beginning of this year I pitched a thread to the mods on the topic of best places to contribute to support American democracy via the Democratic Party, or something like that. (Following helpful feedback by What_Exit, I decided to rewrite the post. Then I procrastinated. )
How to best allocate one’s charitable spending is one of the many great debates of our time. I would like to know whether the new rules (and new thinking by the staff) permit a Consumer Reports style comparison of various charities. Such comparisons would include but not be limited to discussion of expense ratios.
See this GD thread for why expense ratios are of limited benefit when evaluating charities:
See this ATMB thread for policy on charitable fundraising as it existed last November:
How would this be modded? Is it consistent with best practice?
“Those who care about global warming, the future of American democracy, and the future interpretation of Champion v. Ames, should review their finances and consider donating accordingly.”
“Oh, and you can figure out where to best direct your charitable spending at this SDMB thread: …”
Calls to action like this, I understand, are disallowed:
“Give to the DNC, DCCC, DSCC, DLCC. Links are here.” [Note that all 4 are official Democratic Party organizations.]
So you can advocate action in a general way, and you can discuss the best ways to act, but you can’t do both at the same time. I’m hoping that is the policy.
)