I am here to write. Its not about charity. Its about obligation. I got yelled at once no charity through to the publication you got to do it yourself, find a way where it can happen...
I don't think it would be wise to make this an obligatory thing but maybe those on board with the idea can chose to allocate a portion of their subs to charity. I would also hope that Substack would swallow any admin and not take any out of the fund to cover the costs.
The biggest issue is, who decides what causes to support? I'm definitely not in on giving money to any of the bigger charities, firstly because they already have massive fundraising machines and such a small proportion of their funds go to where it's actually needed. While on principle I think its a worthwhile idea I think there are areas of contention to be addressed.
There will obviously be a variety of perspectives on how such a program should work. It's good that we explore all the ideas that may be generated by such discussions. Substack leadership will be the ones to decide such questions in the end because, after all, it's their network, and they have more information than we do.
I can only share my own opinion on these questions, which are...
It's normal on the Internet for we users to expect everything to be customized to our personal taste. We should keep in mind however that every customization requires more work by Substack employees, and if we demand too many features Substack leadership may understandably decide to put their priorities on other projects. My wish is that we keep this as simple as possible for Substack to create, thus making it more likely that they will do so.
Another thing we might keep in mind. At least according to the scheme I've been discussing on this blog, which is only one person's opinion, we are talking about tiny amounts of money, pennies per day. Three pennies a day per Substack account. Three pennies. Thus, I'm hoping my fellow users won't get all wound up and treat this like it's a big decision, because it's actually not.
What interests me the most is seeing this actually happen, and watching with delight as hundreds of thousands of dollars go out the door every year to those who need the money far more than we do. Thus, my vote is for getting this set up by the simplest easiest method possible, and then if Substack leadership wishes to tweak the system later, sure, why not?
Again, these are just one person's opinion, and the question will be settled by Substack leadership.
Thanks again for sharing your perspective, I hope others will join you in doing so.
Yes, I agree that there's much to think about and possibilities to explore! I'm sure plenty of good folk will want to get on board and make this a reality.
Hi Daniel, thanks for your input. Yes, the response from Substackers has been pretty great so far.
I hear you on the choice feature. My guess is that making this a matter of choice would radically reduce the amount of money which was raised, as compared to a tax. If true, is it worth it to serve many fewer needy people, just so some of us can save 3 cents a day?
A choice based system would require somebody to reach out to every writer on Substack, obtain their attention, consider their concerns, hear their ideas, and persuade them to participate. Who is going to do all that work, for free?
I like the choice idea in theory, but in practice I'd rather see needy people served to the greatest degree possible. Just one guy's opinion.
That’s true, if choice were involved a lot less would be raised. Personally, I’d be ok with having it be required knowing it’s going towards a good cause but it’s apparent in this thread there are different opinions on it. Also, deciding which causes to support would be a separate issue. It’s a thoughtful idea in my opinion.
The money would never get to those people if you just donate it to a nonprofit that says they’re for a cause because they pay themselves with that money and alot of those nonprofits are fake.
At the end of the day, what I said isn’t any less true. Regardless to whether or not I use a photo of myself or my own artwork. If you’re not getting the money physically and directly into the hands of the needy, it will not solve the problem. If you’re older than ME even and don’t understand that, then that’s why western society has devolved to what it is now and exactly why the rest of the world is moving on and looking at other opportunities…
Ok Ralph. Yes buddy, I'm older than you. It looks like maybe 50 years older or so. So respectfully, I'll stick with my own understanding. We can agree to disagree, and I wish you a fine day indeed.
The concept is intriguing. However, if implemented, any charitable group that is targeted would need to be thoroughly investigated. I have also come across "charities" that retain a significant portion of donations for operational expenses. They could benefit from improved business management. If they were to retain 60% or less, they would be considered an acceptable charity.
Based on the comments above, it seems that only a volunteer perspective should be considered. You do raise some valid points regarding this idea.
Thanks for your interest Walter, appreciated. The purpose of this blog is to encourage just the kind of conversations you invite us in to here.
I am in no way an expert on the nonprofit world. However, others will be expert in this area, and you're right, it would be wise to identify such experts and learn from them. I'll see what I can come up with in this regard, and if successful will add what I learn to this blog. Others are invited to share their research too. My hope is that this will become a community effort.
My first goal with Writers As Heroes is just to alert the Substack community that we have it within our power to create an automated fund raising machine together. In order for anything to happen along these lines, a significant number of Substack users will have to see that possibility, and express their desire that this feature be added to Substack in some form.
I'm convinced that the Substack team will create almost any feature that Substack users want, because the Substack team has been earnestly doing just that for years now. Our job is to make clear what we want in general terms.
If Substack leadership does decide to go in this direction, it will be their job to decide how such a system will be implemented. It is after all their network, and they have access to much more information than we do. My guess is that they would choose to fund non-controversial projects that can receive wide support across the community.
Thanks again for your comment and support of this project, it is very much appreciated.
I have always held the philosophy that if you have a dollar, you have at least 10 cents to share. But by the same token I deeply resent being obligated to share with any organization that espouses ideologies I seriously oppose.
I do not begrudge providing public assistance to those members of society who truly need help. Lots of “charities” make donations to political pac’s so any connection to public policy makers or influencers is an enormous red flag. I think that a variety of charities should be put up for consideration by writers and readers alike, at least initially to establish mutually agreed upon possible organizations that substack leadership can choose from (that can change according to subscriber and writers pre-approved list) without a platform wide repeated vote. It would also instill far more confidence if there was a reporting “site” that everyone could see charity stats.
It might also be helpful for subscribers to have an easy, clear way to offer additional donations.
This is an intriguing idea so I will keep an eye out for its genesis.
What I'd hope to see are other articles and blogs across Substack which explore such ideas in more detail. Writers As Heroes doesn't have an exclusive license on this subject, anybody can write about it of course.
The bottom line is that Substack leadership should be able to see that there is widespread interest in some kind of fund raising machine being part of Substack.
Exactly how such a fund raising system would operate is Substack leadership's job to decide. Our job is to make publicly clear our desire that such a system be established.
writers can be effective agents of change, and heroic by activist public works and organizing debate in parliaments. the “charity tax” idea strikes me as any united fund or UN fund, and so not special to writers. i would not be supportive of such a plan.
I never heard this expression "writers as heroes" in my life, and I live a long life. Writers never have (or had or were) been the Heroes. They live a solitary, thoughtful life, creating their heroes and happy to be published to make some money to continues their heroic labor. I just do not understand the program.
Hi Larisa, thanks for commenting. It's possible you never heard that expression because I just made it up about a month ago. :-) The point of the expression is just to suggest that writers have the option to sometimes focus on the needs of others besides themselves, as we all do. Have a good one!
Thank you for explanation. Very original concept. When I become a writer, I, definitely, will support your program, though now you can support me by following my work. Thanks, good luck.
I am here to write. Its not about charity. Its about obligation. I got yelled at once no charity through to the publication you got to do it yourself, find a way where it can happen...
I don't think it would be wise to make this an obligatory thing but maybe those on board with the idea can chose to allocate a portion of their subs to charity. I would also hope that Substack would swallow any admin and not take any out of the fund to cover the costs.
The biggest issue is, who decides what causes to support? I'm definitely not in on giving money to any of the bigger charities, firstly because they already have massive fundraising machines and such a small proportion of their funds go to where it's actually needed. While on principle I think its a worthwhile idea I think there are areas of contention to be addressed.
Hi Remanon, thanks for your interest and note.
There will obviously be a variety of perspectives on how such a program should work. It's good that we explore all the ideas that may be generated by such discussions. Substack leadership will be the ones to decide such questions in the end because, after all, it's their network, and they have more information than we do.
I can only share my own opinion on these questions, which are...
It's normal on the Internet for we users to expect everything to be customized to our personal taste. We should keep in mind however that every customization requires more work by Substack employees, and if we demand too many features Substack leadership may understandably decide to put their priorities on other projects. My wish is that we keep this as simple as possible for Substack to create, thus making it more likely that they will do so.
Another thing we might keep in mind. At least according to the scheme I've been discussing on this blog, which is only one person's opinion, we are talking about tiny amounts of money, pennies per day. Three pennies a day per Substack account. Three pennies. Thus, I'm hoping my fellow users won't get all wound up and treat this like it's a big decision, because it's actually not.
What interests me the most is seeing this actually happen, and watching with delight as hundreds of thousands of dollars go out the door every year to those who need the money far more than we do. Thus, my vote is for getting this set up by the simplest easiest method possible, and then if Substack leadership wishes to tweak the system later, sure, why not?
Again, these are just one person's opinion, and the question will be settled by Substack leadership.
Thanks again for sharing your perspective, I hope others will join you in doing so.
Yes, I agree that there's much to think about and possibilities to explore! I'm sure plenty of good folk will want to get on board and make this a reality.
Great idea here Phil. I’d say give writers a choice to be part of the charity. I’m sure many would sign up.
Hi Daniel, thanks for your input. Yes, the response from Substackers has been pretty great so far.
I hear you on the choice feature. My guess is that making this a matter of choice would radically reduce the amount of money which was raised, as compared to a tax. If true, is it worth it to serve many fewer needy people, just so some of us can save 3 cents a day?
A choice based system would require somebody to reach out to every writer on Substack, obtain their attention, consider their concerns, hear their ideas, and persuade them to participate. Who is going to do all that work, for free?
I like the choice idea in theory, but in practice I'd rather see needy people served to the greatest degree possible. Just one guy's opinion.
That’s true, if choice were involved a lot less would be raised. Personally, I’d be ok with having it be required knowing it’s going towards a good cause but it’s apparent in this thread there are different opinions on it. Also, deciding which causes to support would be a separate issue. It’s a thoughtful idea in my opinion.
The money would never get to those people if you just donate it to a nonprofit that says they’re for a cause because they pay themselves with that money and alot of those nonprofits are fake.
https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ff152af37-4b16-4dd6-b1f1-2c00dcd71d16_1000x998.jpeg
Read the bio. Am I asking anything of anybody? No. Exactly.
Plus, anybody can Google search the name and it’ll link back to my real name, so it’s not that secretive just because I’m using a pseudonym.
At the end of the day, what I said isn’t any less true. Regardless to whether or not I use a photo of myself or my own artwork. If you’re not getting the money physically and directly into the hands of the needy, it will not solve the problem. If you’re older than ME even and don’t understand that, then that’s why western society has devolved to what it is now and exactly why the rest of the world is moving on and looking at other opportunities…
Ok Ralph. Yes buddy, I'm older than you. It looks like maybe 50 years older or so. So respectfully, I'll stick with my own understanding. We can agree to disagree, and I wish you a fine day indeed.
Doesn’t change what I initially said. I don’t care if you don’t like how I said it.
The concept is intriguing. However, if implemented, any charitable group that is targeted would need to be thoroughly investigated. I have also come across "charities" that retain a significant portion of donations for operational expenses. They could benefit from improved business management. If they were to retain 60% or less, they would be considered an acceptable charity.
Based on the comments above, it seems that only a volunteer perspective should be considered. You do raise some valid points regarding this idea.
Thanks for your interest Walter, appreciated. The purpose of this blog is to encourage just the kind of conversations you invite us in to here.
I am in no way an expert on the nonprofit world. However, others will be expert in this area, and you're right, it would be wise to identify such experts and learn from them. I'll see what I can come up with in this regard, and if successful will add what I learn to this blog. Others are invited to share their research too. My hope is that this will become a community effort.
My first goal with Writers As Heroes is just to alert the Substack community that we have it within our power to create an automated fund raising machine together. In order for anything to happen along these lines, a significant number of Substack users will have to see that possibility, and express their desire that this feature be added to Substack in some form.
I'm convinced that the Substack team will create almost any feature that Substack users want, because the Substack team has been earnestly doing just that for years now. Our job is to make clear what we want in general terms.
If Substack leadership does decide to go in this direction, it will be their job to decide how such a system will be implemented. It is after all their network, and they have access to much more information than we do. My guess is that they would choose to fund non-controversial projects that can receive wide support across the community.
Thanks again for your comment and support of this project, it is very much appreciated.
I have always held the philosophy that if you have a dollar, you have at least 10 cents to share. But by the same token I deeply resent being obligated to share with any organization that espouses ideologies I seriously oppose.
I do not begrudge providing public assistance to those members of society who truly need help. Lots of “charities” make donations to political pac’s so any connection to public policy makers or influencers is an enormous red flag. I think that a variety of charities should be put up for consideration by writers and readers alike, at least initially to establish mutually agreed upon possible organizations that substack leadership can choose from (that can change according to subscriber and writers pre-approved list) without a platform wide repeated vote. It would also instill far more confidence if there was a reporting “site” that everyone could see charity stats.
It might also be helpful for subscribers to have an easy, clear way to offer additional donations.
This is an intriguing idea so I will keep an eye out for its genesis.
Hi Maureen,
You offer some great ideas for our consideration.
1) create a list of desired charities
2) a reporting site with info on charities
3) an easy way to make additional donations
What I'd hope to see are other articles and blogs across Substack which explore such ideas in more detail. Writers As Heroes doesn't have an exclusive license on this subject, anybody can write about it of course.
The bottom line is that Substack leadership should be able to see that there is widespread interest in some kind of fund raising machine being part of Substack.
Exactly how such a fund raising system would operate is Substack leadership's job to decide. Our job is to make publicly clear our desire that such a system be established.
Thanks for your input!
If you give people an option and a reason, you’ll get results. It’s a proven model 🙂
writers can be effective agents of change, and heroic by activist public works and organizing debate in parliaments. the “charity tax” idea strikes me as any united fund or UN fund, and so not special to writers. i would not be supportive of such a plan.
I never heard this expression "writers as heroes" in my life, and I live a long life. Writers never have (or had or were) been the Heroes. They live a solitary, thoughtful life, creating their heroes and happy to be published to make some money to continues their heroic labor. I just do not understand the program.
Hi Larisa, thanks for commenting. It's possible you never heard that expression because I just made it up about a month ago. :-) The point of the expression is just to suggest that writers have the option to sometimes focus on the needs of others besides themselves, as we all do. Have a good one!
Thank you for explanation. Very original concept. When I become a writer, I, definitely, will support your program, though now you can support me by following my work. Thanks, good luck.