|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Aug 28, 2014 19:09:34 GMT -5
I challenge Gary Bettman to a Boiling Water Bucket challenge!
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Aug 29, 2014 22:42:51 GMT -5
I was challenged by a few friends but it's not my thing. Cancer has had its way with the female side of my family and with my wife's family, too ... This my charity of choice ... I respect those who took the challenge and who contributed to the cause ... But I'm pretty sure not everyone who took the challenge actually contributed ... That's where it wore thin for me, anyway ... To each, their own ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Aug 29, 2014 22:51:38 GMT -5
I was challenged by a few friends but it's not my thing. Cancer has had its way with the female side of my family and with my wife's family, too ... This my charity of choice ... I respect those who took the challenge and who contributed to the cause ... But I'm pretty sure not everyone who took the challenge actually contributed ... That's where it wore thin for me, anyway ... To each, their own ... Cheers. Lots of nice people jumped on the challenge. It was a fun thing and it ballooned into a fad of the week, 15 minutes of fame, me too do gooder in crowd. After the initial smile it started to wear thin for me. It's harmless, ALS is a bad thing and fortunately not many are afflicted compared to cancer. Then again I'm tired af watching Jerry Lewis doing his telethons too. No offense intended, it just isn't my cuppa. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 29, 2014 23:14:30 GMT -5
we know a family that has seen 9 die of it [it's obviously a large family] in the last couple of years . . . devastating. more to come -- some have been tested and know that they carry the gene and are just waiting for onset; others haven't taken the test --they don't want to know.
we support them by going on the ALS walk every year and I will be doing the challenge next week [just a timing thing, catching the tail end]. it's a support for the family thing -- and I find that I'm "shilling" for it -- at least speaking up for the IBC against those who say that there are "better" or "more worthy" recipients of donations. that's garbage. as you say, Dis, people give to charity of choice. cancer runs through my in-laws family so that's another close-to-the-heart charity. I simply encourage people to be sure that they don't spend ever cent on themselves.
on another matter, being involved with this family with ALS is certainly making me rethink end-of-life care.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gogie on Aug 30, 2014 8:24:38 GMT -5
The problem with the ice bucket challenge (and there was an excellent editorial in the National Post about this earlier this week) is that it's all well and good to raise money for the cause but this challenge has become excessive. The amount of money raised for ALS far exceeds the amount they can possibly spend on effective research in the foreseeable future. And probably more worrying, the challenge has undoubtedly diverted funds from other causes that could put the money to better immediate use. In some cases the money raised would probably not have gone to other charities, but in many cases it would have.
I fully support these types of causes within reason. Like Dis, I have had my share of troubles that lead me to support other causes - prostate cancer research, heart disease and alzheimer's (and its many related diseases) are all personal causes of mine. I can only give so much and I try to direct my giving to those causes that matter most from my perspective. I've given to ALS in the past but I've decided not to support the ice bucket challenge.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 30, 2014 9:13:25 GMT -5
I can only give so much and I try to direct my giving to those causes that matter most from my perspective. Gogie, this is where I sit on the situation too. give to a cause that's close to your heart. I do take issue with that NP editorial, though. First, excessive? wrong word. it isn't over the top, it isn't one party doing something continually. in fact, refreshing (no pun intended) would be a better word -- something new, something different, something out of the ordinary. now if it is started up again next summer (because it is a waning "fad") then I'm willing to revisit the word. Second, "exceeds spending in the foreseeable future". what it does is allow more researchers. if this were for cancer research [for example], I think that there would be a great celebration . . . more labs can be opened!. Third, "diverted funds". perhaps. but again, if it were cancer being talked about I don't think the issue would be raised. and this argument suggests that one cause is better than another cause. which leads to the comment that offends me but isn't mentioned here (but I will) Fourth, "not enough people die of the disease every year to give it the attention it is being given". I know that those aren't the words used, but read some of the commentaries: only x number of people die of ALS every year, and only x number of people are diagnosed with it, while x number of people are diagnosed and die of fill in your preferred group) every year. points back to "my cause is more important than yours". this MacLeans article talks about per death ratios and places with greater need (fwiw, I agree that there are humanitarian crises . . . I'm not sure that the money send to many of the charitable organizations -- like the UN -- actually makes it there because so much is used in administration costs -- but that is another issue altogether). my perspective (not pointed to anyone here): if you don't want to give to a cause (be it ALS, cancer, heart and stroke, etc), don't. and if you think the cause deserves more attention/money/etc . . . find a way to do it. but quit harping on the Ice Bucket Challenge. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Aug 30, 2014 9:46:32 GMT -5
Seeing as it's from INFO WARS….it could be conspiratorial.  Or there could be truth in it. ICE BUCKET CHALLENGE: ALS FOUNDATION ADMITS LESS THAN 27% OF DONATIONS FUND RESEARCH AND CURESDon't know if that's ALS's cost breakdown in all fundraising efforts. If it IS, then what's the surprise? |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 30, 2014 11:34:50 GMT -5
that does seem excessive, CH. I imagine that the argument would be that the percentages are so high because the "income" is so low -- especially as compared with charities that are higher visibility.
ALS does say that giving is used for research, support of those with the disease, and public education . . . but the research end of things does seem low.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Aug 30, 2014 12:00:53 GMT -5
we know a family that has seen 9 die of it [it's obviously a large family] in the last couple of years . . . devastating. more to come -- some have been tested and know that they carry the gene and are just waiting for onset; others haven't taken the test --they don't want to know. we support them by going on the ALS walk every year and I will be doing the challenge next week [just a timing thing, catching the tail end]. it's a support for the family thing -- and I find that I'm "shilling" for it -- at least speaking up for the IBC against those who say that there are "better" or "more worthy" recipients of donations. that's garbage. as you say, Dis, people give to charity of choice. cancer runs through my in-laws family so that's another close-to-the-heart charity. I simply encourage people to be sure that they don't spend ever cent on themselves. on another matter, being involved with this family with ALS is certainly making me rethink end-of-life care. If I had known any personal friends or relatives who came down with ALS, I'm quite sure I'd feel different about it ... you know, people close and dear to me ... what actually distanced me from the hype was just how quickly ALS came to the forefront and how quick people were to jump into the it ... it was like the cause became secondary to the people who wanted to be recognized for dumping a bucket of ice water on themselves ... the fad raised quite a bit for ALS, so in that context it was a good thing ... I just didn't feel that every person who partook in the challenge were sincere about their motives ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 30, 2014 12:55:00 GMT -5
what actually distanced me from the hype was just how quickly ALS came to the forefront and how quick people were to jump into the it ... it was like the cause became secondary to the people who wanted to be recognized for dumping a bucket of ice water on themselves ... I just didn't feel that every person who partook in the challenge were sincere about their motives ... agree wholeheartedly. some say "any attention is good attention" . . . but when ego takes over the cause (whatever cause it is) loses. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Aug 30, 2014 13:09:24 GMT -5
Charities have always used "fun" things to raise awareness and motivate donations.
Dances, rib fests, silent auctions, Movember, et al. As long as the money is allocated/used properly, then so be it. Yes, there are definitely those who NEED the public recognition. Part of the "15 minutes of fame" social media mirage.
Good luck to the next charity trying something of this viral nature.
The Colitis Hot Coals Challenge?
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Aug 30, 2014 13:42:08 GMT -5
what actually distanced me from the hype was just how quickly ALS came to the forefront and how quick people were to jump into the it ... it was like the cause became secondary to the people who wanted to be recognized for dumping a bucket of ice water on themselves ... I just didn't feel that every person who partook in the challenge were sincere about their motives ... agree wholeheartedly. some say "any attention is good attention" . . . but when ego takes over the cause (whatever cause it is) loses. It's as I was saying before ... I respect those who participated and who actually made donations ... as HFLA said, it's just not my cuppa ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 30, 2014 13:56:52 GMT -5
because I am admittedly close to the issue, I may come off sounding like a shill for the ALS organization. please know that I am not.
I wrote to the Ontario branch as soon as I read CH's post this morning to find out what is what. amazingly, I received a reply. I include it here (read or ignore):
Thank you for your email, for supporting ALS and seeking clarification.
The article you have directed me to is for a US organization, and unrelated to ALS Canada except that we share a willingness to work together to assist people living with ALS and find a treatment for this devastating disease.
In 2013, 29% of our funds went to our national research program, 9% of our overall budget went to administration. We expect the percentages to change substantially for 2014 and moving forward due to the gift of the Ice Bucket Challenge.
It is important to note, ALS Canada does much more beyond supporting ALS research which is why the proportion to research is 29%. We also serve the 1100 people in Ontario living with ALS through such things as the provision and assistance with equipment, support groups, bereavement group and home visits as individuals and their families navigate the progression of the disease. We advocate locally, within the healthcare system and federally to have better support for people and their families while they are living with ALS. ALS Canada is also Member of the Federation Council of ALS Societies across Canada, and as the largest, national entity we also provide support to the other Provinces so they are better able to serve their population of people living with ALS.
As you can see from the list, research is one part of our charitable purpose, albeit a very important aspect. The breakdown of the funds we received for 2013 are published online and in our annual report.
ALS Canada audited/published financials for 2013:
29% research - grants (21%), program support - national ALS Canada Research Conference, travel grants for ALS researchers, etc. (8%)
21% client services
6% public awareness
4% federation - national support
4% volunteer program development
Admin (9%)
Governance (2%)
Fundraising (25%)
We recognize fundraising is a significant portion of the overhead, but is well within the acceptable guidelines put out by CRA and Imagine Canada. We must have a comprehensive fundraising portfolio - just as anyone would with their investments, some low risk/higher cost balanced with higher risk/lower costs - we wouldn't want to see a season of bad weather wipe out all of our WALKs and primary funding source, so we must balance the portfolio, as donations are the only funding source we have.
Governance was also higher last year as we had costs associated with a merger between ALS Canada and ALS Ontario, which was done to create great efficiencies and cost savings for the future and we are already seeing those savings translate this year.
We are fortunate with the Ice Bucket Challenge for the generosity of many people that have freely given, we will now be able to significantly reduce our fundraising costs. If this happened all the time and for all charities, everyone could put more money into their charitable purpose. Due to the awareness this has raised in the general public, it will also help tremendously for the conversations we need to have, so our public awareness costs may also be reduced.
25% for fundraising is a lot. <10% admin for an organization is pretty good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Aug 30, 2014 14:13:23 GMT -5
ALS is a terrible disease. It is slowly progressive and creates fear before it is diagnosed and after is begins. It robs control and independence. It affects families of genetic carriers.
My issue is not with the disease or the charity but rather with the self important people who think they discovered the brilliant and unique manner of dumping a bucket of water over their head and preserving their academy award performance on Youtube.support the charity but pass on the theatrics.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Aug 30, 2014 16:33:43 GMT -5
In the first place... what's the connection between ALS and dumping a bucket of ice water over one's head? Is it supposed to be "shocking to the system"....a "wake-up call"? Is it supposed to illustrate some kind of "special commitment"? Like I asked earlier, what's next? Alzheimer's Bikini Wax Challenge? You wait....I'll bet I'm not too far off. Something has to match/beat the Ice Bucket. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 30, 2014 17:24:54 GMT -5
In the first place... what's the connection between ALS and dumping a bucket of ice water over one's head? no connection at all, of course. a unique and different way to raise money. I don't think anyone expected it to take off like it did. I think what you mean is  I expect wheels are turning to try to better the challenge. does the cancer "Face Your Fears" challenge do it? [/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Aug 30, 2014 18:33:17 GMT -5
I wasn't meaning to be serious, franko. Just riffing a bit. But the Ice Bucket WILL be trumped....and it'll move from the good-natured to the humiliating to the masochistic/painful. We'll progressively punk ourselves for the good of society.  The Crohn's Run Down Your Street Naked Challenge. However, on a serious note, I hope it doesn't go beyond the self. I can't imagine donating $50 to Heart & Stroke giving one the license to humiliate/frighten someone else. Although, JFL Gags has made a ton of dough from that practice. Candid Camera on 'roids. They're in the midst of being sued, I believe. About time, IMO. [/thread-hijack] |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 30, 2014 18:51:37 GMT -5
I wasn't meaning to be serious, franko. Just riffing a bit. But the Ice Bucket WILL be trumped....and it'll move from the good-natured to the humiliating to the masochistic/painful. We'll progressively punk ourselves for the good of society. The Crohn's Run Down Your Street Naked Challenge. riffing or not, you're right. after all, how can such a minor problem get such major attention? have to rectify that. and speaking of rectify, I shudder to think what they'll come up with for the colonoscopy challenge. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 31, 2014 14:35:25 GMT -5
It HAS become about ego when someone dumps a dump truck worth of cold water on themselves (I'm looking at you PK). While it raised awareness, it also brought out all the attention whores who thought that they are sooooo publicly coolz by participating.
I donated a sum....but here is the deal, I can only donate so much. By giving to one cause, I have less left for another cause. The other issue is that I have more time then money, unfortunately, they have no use for my time.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 31, 2014 15:47:20 GMT -5
It HAS become about ego when someone dumps a dump truck worth of cold water on themselves (I'm looking at you PK). While it raised awareness, it also brought out all the attention whores who thought that they are sooooo publicly coolz by participating. I donated a sum....but here is the deal, I can only donate so much. By giving to one cause, I have less left for another cause. The other issue is that I have more time then money, unfortunately, they have no use for my time. sure they (or any other cause) does: go out fundraising. I do a small route for Heart and Stroke every February. Just some houses down the block . . . enough of us do it to cover the neighbourhood. there's always something you can do, HA. but I think they'd prefer if you didn't teach Sunday School. **shudders at the thought of the teaching** |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Aug 31, 2014 19:46:11 GMT -5
It HAS become about ego when someone dumps a dump truck worth of cold water on themselves (I'm looking at you PK). While it raised awareness, it also brought out all the attention whores who thought that they are sooooo publicly coolz by participating. I donated a sum....but here is the deal, I can only donate so much. By giving to one cause, I have less left for another cause. The other issue is that I have more time then money, unfortunately, they have no use for my time. sure they (or any other cause) does: go out fundraising. I do a small route for Heart and Stroke every February. Just some houses down the block . . . enough of us do it to cover the neighbourhood. there's always something you can do, HA. but I think they'd prefer if you didn't teach Sunday School. **shudders at the thought of the teaching** Me? Door to door? ME?? With or without a police escort? Half the time I would be making them an offer they can't refuse....the other half, I would be trying to get lucky........ |
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on Sept 1, 2014 6:40:30 GMT -5
The idea of the challenge was: Once someone challenges you, you have 24hrs to dump the bucket and post it on Twitter\Facebook. If you don't succeed, donate $100 to ALS. The magic is that people were doing both. It's a challenge to raise awareness. Make people think about the disease. I, for one, knew that ALS was what kille Lou Gehrig. Other than that, I had no idea what it was. If all the challenge did was inform people, great.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Sept 1, 2014 8:25:12 GMT -5
because I am admittedly close to the issue, I may come off sounding like a shill for the ALS organization. please know that I am not. I wrote to the Ontario branch as soon as I read CH's post this morning to find out what is what. amazingly, I received a reply. I include it here (read or ignore): Thank you for your email, for supporting ALS and seeking clarification.
The article you have directed me to is for a US organization, and unrelated to ALS Canada except that we share a willingness to work together to assist people living with ALS and find a treatment for this devastating disease.
In 2013, 29% of our funds went to our national research program, 9% of our overall budget went to administration. We expect the percentages to change substantially for 2014 and moving forward due to the gift of the Ice Bucket Challenge.
It is important to note, ALS Canada does much more beyond supporting ALS research which is why the proportion to research is 29%. We also serve the 1100 people in Ontario living with ALS through such things as the provision and assistance with equipment, support groups, bereavement group and home visits as individuals and their families navigate the progression of the disease. We advocate locally, within the healthcare system and federally to have better support for people and their families while they are living with ALS. ALS Canada is also Member of the Federation Council of ALS Societies across Canada, and as the largest, national entity we also provide support to the other Provinces so they are better able to serve their population of people living with ALS.
As you can see from the list, research is one part of our charitable purpose, albeit a very important aspect. The breakdown of the funds we received for 2013 are published online and in our annual report.
ALS Canada audited/published financials for 2013:
29% research - grants (21%), program support - national ALS Canada Research Conference, travel grants for ALS researchers, etc. (8%)
21% client services
6% public awareness
4% federation - national support
4% volunteer program development
Admin (9%)
Governance (2%)
Fundraising (25%)
We recognize fundraising is a significant portion of the overhead, but is well within the acceptable guidelines put out by CRA and Imagine Canada. We must have a comprehensive fundraising portfolio - just as anyone would with their investments, some low risk/higher cost balanced with higher risk/lower costs - we wouldn't want to see a season of bad weather wipe out all of our WALKs and primary funding source, so we must balance the portfolio, as donations are the only funding source we have.
Governance was also higher last year as we had costs associated with a merger between ALS Canada and ALS Ontario, which was done to create great efficiencies and cost savings for the future and we are already seeing those savings translate this year.
We are fortunate with the Ice Bucket Challenge for the generosity of many people that have freely given, we will now be able to significantly reduce our fundraising costs. If this happened all the time and for all charities, everyone could put more money into their charitable purpose. Due to the awareness this has raised in the general public, it will also help tremendously for the conversations we need to have, so our public awareness costs may also be reduced.25% for fundraising is a lot. <10% admin for an organization is pretty good. It should be noted that ALS had absolutely nothing to do with the Ice Bucket challenge, or spent a single dime on for fundraising. From what I understand, the Ice Bucket Challenge started with three guys on a dare. They each decided to name a charity, and pass-it-on. One guy named ALS. (Can anyone name the other two??? ) I saw an interview on TV where a guy who monitors charities stated that ALS had no overhead costs on this challenge, and even he said he had to look up the other charities (though he didn't name them, either) |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Sept 1, 2014 9:13:30 GMT -5
A somewhat thorough look at the origin...it seems to have many parents. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Sept 1, 2014 9:37:21 GMT -5
wiki posits most of the same info
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Sept 1, 2014 12:47:36 GMT -5
World wide, they've raised about 100 million since mid July. $10 of that is mine. The way I look at it, if everyone donated one dollar to three charities - one dollar a year - those charities would have it made. As for 'over funding' a charity, I don't think that's possible. 7 billion people on the planet, and at least half that more than capable of living without $3 a year. Think what Cancer research, ALS, and let's say Heart and Stroke organizations could do with a billion each.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Sept 1, 2014 13:38:27 GMT -5
what . . . give up a cheap coffee? how dare you suggest such a thing! realistically, The average annual amount per donor (in Canada, 2010) was $446 in 2010, while the median amount was $123. StatsCanit's a "pick-and-chose" thing . . . which is only right. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 27, 2016 8:58:02 GMT -5
|
|
