A Missed Nuance
Those of you who haven't read my Open Letter to Vince Hemingson from yesterday, please read it before you continue.
Today, after reading a discussion between Allen Leigh and Vince, I posted the following on Vince's blog:
Vince,
I have to say that I agree with you that those who make a charitable donation THEMSELVES and do not go to the effort to collect from others violate the intent of the BAA. Imagine the money they could collect if (and I think it's likely) their friends are of similar means. I stand by my point that they are there within the rules, but I do have to agree that while not violating the letter of the rules, they violate the spirit. Perhaps Boston should require the charitable fund raisers to provide a copy of their tax return and the charitable money raised for Boston must be 5% or more of their last year's income. (OK, it's an unrealistic thing, but it makes you wonder how much more good could be done?)
Meantime, I think we can both walk away winners in this debate. I've agreed that those who simply buy their way in, without the work of either training to qualify or the labor of making the (fundraising) ask, are, to some extent, tainted in their participation.
I win the point that in most cases, the bona fide "good works" of many of the charitable runners does make their toeing the line at Hopkinton legitimate.
I'd also like to publicly thank those who weighed in on this debate, especially Allen Leigh, who managed to pick up on the nuance that I'd missed. (The difference between writing a check and collecting for charity.) Thank you all.
Wayne
I enjoy a good debate / argument, especially when it's conducted in gentlemanly fashion. I hope we all learned a bit about this issue and how other people think about it. Again, thank you to all who weighed in on this subject.
Today, after reading a discussion between Allen Leigh and Vince, I posted the following on Vince's blog:
Vince,
I have to say that I agree with you that those who make a charitable donation THEMSELVES and do not go to the effort to collect from others violate the intent of the BAA. Imagine the money they could collect if (and I think it's likely) their friends are of similar means. I stand by my point that they are there within the rules, but I do have to agree that while not violating the letter of the rules, they violate the spirit. Perhaps Boston should require the charitable fund raisers to provide a copy of their tax return and the charitable money raised for Boston must be 5% or more of their last year's income. (OK, it's an unrealistic thing, but it makes you wonder how much more good could be done?)
Meantime, I think we can both walk away winners in this debate. I've agreed that those who simply buy their way in, without the work of either training to qualify or the labor of making the (fundraising) ask, are, to some extent, tainted in their participation.
I win the point that in most cases, the bona fide "good works" of many of the charitable runners does make their toeing the line at Hopkinton legitimate.
I'd also like to publicly thank those who weighed in on this debate, especially Allen Leigh, who managed to pick up on the nuance that I'd missed. (The difference between writing a check and collecting for charity.) Thank you all.
Wayne
I enjoy a good debate / argument, especially when it's conducted in gentlemanly fashion. I hope we all learned a bit about this issue and how other people think about it. Again, thank you to all who weighed in on this subject.
posted by Scooter at 1:23 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home