As it stands now, this community serves mostly as a way to get money. That isn’t a bad thing, but cash is not a 1-size-fits-all solution to every problem. Taking care of a persons needs is always priority #1, but at times, said person is unfit to handle money in a way that reliably alleviates those needs. Traditional, local, mutual-aid networks can usually address this in the form of community pot lucks, clothing exchange, etc. Here we are more or less limited to advice and more money.
Making a rule about unsolicited advice and being critical of users, limits us to just money as a tool to solve problems. Sometimes people need a tough conversation to grow as a person, sometimes people need to be reminded of the situation they are in. Yes, the capitalist system is oppressive. Yes, there are systemic issues that prevent us all from succeeding. That doesn’t mean there is no situation where decision making is a factor. Sometimes, you do actually need help making better choices. This isn’t to shame people for making bad decisions, sometimes there are psychiatric reasons, sometimes they genuinely don’t know any better, but you still should speak up so they can potentially correct the problem and learn.
This rule effectively creates a hug-box where we all pretend that personal responsibility doesn’t exist, that there is simply nothing to be done. It’s incredibly infantile, it’s a cope, and the people in this community deserve better than that.
EDIT: I feel I may have had a change of heart after reading the comments left by @EelBolshevikism If you are looking for a somewhat comprehensive response, those comments are likely a good starting point.
This post kind of grosses me out, especially with the (probably incomplete but w/e) context I’ve gathered from comments on this post, and ESPECIALLY with how I’ve seen it happen before on this site (without the site learning from it either…). I don’t mean that to insult you. While I understand it comes across as patronizing to say, I can’t really blame anyone for internalizing probably the most common brainworm in the Anglosphere.
But ultimately I disagree with your point. I don’t think personal responsibility… exists, actually. Even supposedly impulsive and random excessive purchases can usually be attributed to some unmet mental need or some sort of symptom of a common form of neurodivergency. Though, I don’t want to focus on that too much, because I know it’s a really controversial belief and I’d have to go into literally my entire worldview from scratch to explain how any of it makes sense to me - something I don’t want to do and would make this discussion (and comment lol) even longer and more painful than it already is. I do have a different problem with allowing criticism of the actions of those asking for help, though.
I can’t imagine being someone with a drug addiction, or who wants to numb their suffering by buying alcohol, or otherwise supposedly “pissing it all away” on luxuries anyone more rich and privileged would rarely if ever be judged for buying, even and especially here. Only to be met with disdain for daring to… ask for money with the hope of catching the eye of internet strangers with disposable income. Because buying these luxuries, despite being something others can afford, is seen as questionable merely because you are using the money others gave you (many of which would choose to buy said luxury in a heartbeat instead of giving you that money, and would not receive a single glance of judgement for it!)
Allowing people to criticize people for making the “wrong decisions” which leads to them being homeless (apparently, I think that’s silly and if someone is making decisions that lead to that than there are other extenuating conditions, including sometimes mental ones, that lead to those decisions) is problematic for the same reason allowing people to “criticize Wokeism” or “just ask questions” about race is problematic. It isn’t that actually asking questions about the sociological construct of race is inherently bad, or that *actually criticizing a community in a good-faith way is bad, but that the culture we exist in is so fraught with an inherently bad-faith and incorrect view of the subject that anyone who is trying to “just ask questions”, trying to “speak their mind about the Woke”, or trying to “just give advice to someone struggling” is vastly more likely than not
Do you think people are just born into this world homeless? I mean, some probably are, but a LOT of homeless people come from parents abandoning them after coming out, or running out of money due to (rent/addiction/other factor they can’t control well if at all). Am I going to withhold money from someone for making the “wrong decision” of coming out to a family they thought was safe? Of fucking course not. And I’d ESPECIALLY not dissuade others from helping them- And that’s the issue, the kind of “criticism” that people direct towards those asking for money (yes, even on a leftist forum. Plenty of people here, probably the majority, have just as many ableist and classist brainworms as the rest of the USS of Amerikkka, they’re just rarer and more advanced varieties) does not actually help people asking for help change their actions. Changing your actions is FUCKING HARD, especially when you’re talking about quitting an addiction or trying to figure out what the cheapest food is to buy, or where to sleep best without cops finding you and fucking ruining your life. People who are poor have to do way more shit to do and pay for way more shit than people who are rich have to (boots theory) and a poor person “pissing away” 4000 bucks so they can have the semblance of comfortable living is always going to be treated worse than a rich person who actually literally pisses away 4000 bucks in shitty overpriced beer because they pay for their large group of friends to go to a sports game and decide to pay for all the concessions, and that bias will hold true here, until either we bully everyone into not having that mindset (WHICH IT SEEMS VERY OBVIOUS TO ME IS THE POINT OF THE RULE) or the user base is no longer Amerikkkans.
If someone is suffering from being fucking poor, than the only kind of valid and not inherently harmful criticisms you can give would hardly ever register as criticism to most people, and would be closer to providing free information, like helping with finances by helping them figure out how they can spend less while still getting the same quality of life and things they care about, or giving tips about working out, or sharing cheaper recipes or ways to get drugs in safer and more reliable ways than they already are or giving them information about cheap addiction treatment you happen to have useful info about from the area. And these are all things, again, that would hardly register and hardly anyone would ever report, let alone ban (minus maybe the drugs thing so they don’t get the website swatted, but you know what I mean).
So I see very little purpose to allow people to give unwanted criticism to those who are fucking starving, or getting threatened with arrest for being trans, or struggling with fucking drug addiction, because unless those people are afraid of free numbers and columns there’s probably only a few situations where someone would take offense to something that isn’t just motivated by the same ambient fucking classism everyone has everywhere and to be completely frank I don’t think those exceedingly rare situations are worth the risk of allowing people to simultaneously shit on homeless people while hiding under a veneer of “civility”, which the remanding or removal of this rule would cause.
If you think giving money to the person is a bad idea, than just don’t do it, and everyone “responsible” will do the same thing as you.
And to be even more completely honest, this is a trend I see repeatedly and it is blatantly created by the discomfort of the privileged (like you or I probably are in comparison to many people on this comm who post) needing to have a constant stream of money to live, because they want the discomfort of seeing a struggling person to go away after they “buy” it with enough money. And I understand that impulse, because seeing people struggle sucks. But this is fundamentally a form of punching down; It’s a response that blames the one struggling for your discomfort (and, no matter how reasonable it seems to blame them, no it fucking isn’t), instead of the systems and people who put them and you in this fucked situation in the first place.
Leftists generally accept the systemic nature of social conditions. Individual circumstances are given, inherited from the past. Social problems like poverty cannot be reduced to mere individual choices.
On the other hand, the given-ness of our lives does not imply determinism and a lack of free will. Marxism depends on the existence of free will, for without free will there cannot be revolution and social change.
I agree that if someone asks for money, then it is valid for someone to use that money on “vices” just so they can feel human once in a while. I believe that money given freely should be spent freely.
I feel that in this comm, the requests tend to be specific. “I need money to buy some Chipotle” or “need a place to stay tonight” etc. Those requests do impart a responsibility on the recipient. Not an abstract “individual responsibility” that erases social conditions, but a direct personal responsibility to real Hexbear users who probably themselves do not have a lot of money to give.
To say that responsibility does not exist is to say that free will does not exist, that misusing the money was determined from birth and inevitable. I think this is ultimately a destructive view and does not actually help people long term.
Whether advice is helpful really depends on where it comes from; is it paternalistic, or does it contain an empathetic understanding of socially given circumstances?
I tend to agree with lifting the rule, but there would have to be moderation against comments that are paternalistic, and that will be a tough line to walk since it is such a gray area.
I didn’t want to get into arguing about this which is why I left it at only a paragraph mentioning it in passing.
Marxism depends on the existence of free will, for without free will there cannot be revolution and social change.
You are very much misunderstanding Determinism, comrade. Determinism is less about worrying that the future is set in stone and more about understanding that the trajectory of the future is determined by the forces applied in the present.
There are of course many degrees of determinism depending on the philosopher. In western philosophy (which includes Marx) I think it is accurate to contrast determinism with free will. Marx and Marxism are often accused of holding mechanical-deterministic views of history in which revolution is seen to be inevitable in a mechanical sense. This is plainly not the way in which Marx conceived of history, in fact it is exactly the opposite. For example, writings like his Theses on Feuerbach, especially Theses 1 and 3, in which he criticizes the deterministic views of the mechanical materialists which neglect the essential role of human activity (free will).
I’m not looking to start a philosophical debate in the middle of a mutual aid struggle session, comrade. But if you are immediately assuming human activity = free will, you have already put the cart before the horse.
or otherwise supposedly “pissing it all away” on luxuries anyone more rich and privileged would rarely if ever be judged for buying, even and especially here
The point is, it doesn’t matter if you take the money and spend it on drugs. If you’re addicted to drugs, drugs are a basic need. You have to have some amount of them while you’re getting off of them, even if that’s your plan. And if it’s not, I really don’t care except insofar as it keeps you from finding housing and handling your other basic needs.
The problem is not buying drugs with donated money. The problem is failing to take any measures to meet basic needs with the money. To take a $4000 donation and then spend it all on ??? and not use any of it to secure shelter, or food, or other basic needs is a problem. And it’s a problem that cannot be solved by receiving more donated money. Maybe if they got the attention of a billionaire who could give them $50k, then they could satisfy all of their desire to spend money on ??? and still have some left over to spend on food and shelter. But since none of us are billionaires, we simply cannot fill this pit with money alone. If we here on /c/mutual_aid truly want to help the user in question, all we can do is try to convince them to change the way that they are handling what money they do acquire.
We’re not mad that money we gave is being spent on stuff we don’t prefer, we’re not mad at the user in question at all. We’re trying to get through to the user in question that this path they’re walking leads only to an early death and that matters to us because all we want is for our comrades to be safe and healthy.
Yeah, but that isn’t a problem you can solve by “criticizing” them, either. That’s a person who is probably making those decisions because, to them, ??? could genuinely be a mental need or because they just don’t want to suffer in a universe without any sort of pleasure. You could give genuine advice, such as providing a different cheaper kind of shampoo they could use, or even telling them that you’re worried that they’ll starve if they spend everything on this non-basic-need thing. And that would make sense and not even be offensive or demeaning. But that isn’t how most people say things, or “criticize” things. I don’t know why but I feel like, especially here, there is an utter inability to criticize something without also hating it. And while you say that it wasn’t the case here, that simply means it was one of a smattering of exceptions. Exceptions that can only exist because of similar issues happening in aeons past and being responded to.
There’s a difference between “criticizing” someone’s “lack of responsibility” and simply realizing someone else is easier to help, too.
I understand that you want to give genuine advice. And I relate to that, a lot. But, just as in the case of “just asking questions” debatebros and smarmy chuds, if you give a single fucking inch to the people who take any chance to blame the poor for their predicament, they will take a light year. I know this because I’ve seen how people do this to autistic people, to gay people. How people use civility and what would otherwise be genuine questions or critiques to needle and bully others while pretending it’s in their “best interest”.
And I know it’s an issue here because I saw it happen before on this very site. Does “rachel” ring a bell at all? She was poor, recently homeless, and a drug addict. We criticized her for valid reasons, yeah. But the ability to criticize was not just utilized for that. People got angry, and people get vindicative. Pretty soon we bullied a homeless woman off of our platform because the presence of someone we can’t help because of the sheer depth of their needs was too uncomfortable for us. People couldn’t properly externalize Rachel’s issues as being a result of numerous complex systems and I saw them continue blaming her for her entire situation. Not the FBI for flooding her neighborhood with drugs, not the systems of capital for grinding her amenities available into fucking nothing, not even her friends for making her homeless in the first place (because she made bad decisions if i remember correctly?? she didn’t kill anyone or anything justifying a death sentence though so it’s irrelevant to me). The Amerikkka brain just took over and all material analysis and the usual calm of this place was lost in a writhing hive of fucking hatred for this single homeless woman, not merely limited to overly hostile pleas or understandable anger from her for not getting the financial assistance she needs- If someone took personal offense to her lashing out that would be one thing. But as she retreated and went more and more on the defensive and stopped even asking for anything they continued to thrash her with constant hostility. Even mentioning her name was like mentioning furries on a Brotherhood of Steel roleplay discord server.
That paragraph probably makes me sound like a Rachel alt but I genuinely am not, I just saw it happen and it fucked with my head
I don’t know if I feel comfortable with this site taking any step even remotely toward allowing that kind of thing to happen again. I don’t feel like I can trust it. And I wish I could, but I can’t, and the only reason I’ve grown slightly more trusting over time since that incident is because of rules like this.
Of course it is reasonable to analyze someone’s situation and realize giving them money is not effective. It would even, in theory, be reasonable to say it, to explain why you can’t give them money, even to point to others who you can help easier and therefore you don’t have the money for this harder case left-over, as long as it was said in a non-judgemental and normal way. But I don’t trust people to say it that way because I’m not sure if Amerikkkan-brained people even can. Even some of the best, most compassionate, and most kind people I know treat homeless and destitute people like they’re all scammers or going to stab them to death. I generally trust people but, in this case, that trust is not more powerful than the sheer strength of Amerikkkan brainworms.
Tbf it could be effective to have a “Don’t judge or hate those asking even if you’re pointing out suboptimal decisions” rule, but I don’t even know if we could use that little leeway responsibly or if it devolve into weird passive-aggressive shit.
Does “rachel” ring a bell at all? She was poor, recently homeless, and a drug addict.
Funny you should ask. Those of us who have given to the venmo of the person this discussion is about, know that the first-name she gave on venmo (which I believe is not her real name, given a conversation about payment-app opsec she had shortly after joining this site) is Rachel.
I will note, however, that I recall the original Rachel being banned for violations of rules relating to trans issues (I seem to recall the term “truscum”), not run off of the site for making bad decisions. Not trying to argue about the broader point, just mentioning my recollection of those events.
Wati, what the fuck, it’s the same fucking person? The same one who bragged about scamming people the first time? Goddamn, we’re a bunch of fucking marks here
I somehow missed the scamming allegations, but yeah she posted a lot of personal details that matched up with the old storyofrachel on cth. I’ve just been assuming it was the same person but also I missed all this drama.
Also her display name on her payment info
I think she was banned multiple times. I wouldn’t be surprised if she got shit on, left, then returned, then got banned for being brain wormed…
deleted by creator
Pretty soon we bullied a homeless woman off of our platform because the presence of someone we can’t help because of the sheer depth of their needs was too uncomfortable for us
She got “bullied off” for calling people slurs and bragging about scanning people. She dug her own grave when it came to this site.
she literally didn’t though, people shit on her long before she started spouting that shit
I am pretty sure “rachel” bragged about getting one over on all of us etc etc? or did I imagine that? p. sure they went off the deep end, not us
No, we went on the deep end either way. Even if she faked the whole thing and was scamming us that means we reacted the way we did (with a shitton of anger, and I remember seeing people respond this way before she was banned forever, and arguing about how she “scammed” them by buying drugs with the money, etc) to what we thought was a real homeless person
Either that or I’m seriously misremembering things which is possible. Either way there was a weird amount of rhetoric about how she was too irresponsible with money and “scammed” donators that made me really uncomfortable
I recall her calling me a f****t at the same time she was bragging about scamming me, so I don’t really appreciate you suggesting the anger was unwarranted
the anger before that was unwarranted. Not going to defend transphobia
Nobody knew she was a shitty person before that. They were shitting on her for what they perceived as being a irresponsible homeless person
deleted by creator
arguing about how she “scammed” them by buying drugs with the money
but they bragged about doing that tho
there’s a reason they were banned…
To my memory, Rachel was actually banned for unrelated instances of certain queerphobic comments. That’s according to the modlog as I recall it. Ultimately it had nothing to do with the incident you described. There was also genuine evidence that her account was actually taken over by someone else, leading to that post. But ultimately that wasn’t the reason she was banned.
Before that, there was an actual transphobic witch hunt directed against her and other trans users of this site by wreckers off the site. Back when this place was new and called chapo.chat, we had regular raids coming in from kiwifarms and transphobic harassment discords pulling shit like that all the time because their attention had followed us here from the reddit banning of r/chapotraphouse.
Ya know…I think you changed my mind on this.
I want us to work towards a site culture that can give advice to people without being a dick about it, but I think that takes work.
You have no idea what the person who donated that was thinking. As far as I am concerned, this is between that user and some rich donator who had too much money to spare and related to this user’s struggle. This comm is for the good for the community, and this kind of directed anger toward one situation none of us can fully understand is not helpful to anyone else who has been sincerely helped by c/mutual aid.
You have no idea what the person who donated that was thinking.
It doesn’t matter what the person who donated the $4000 was thinking, the money could have literally appeared from thin air and nothing relevant to us here on this comm would change. It doesn’t matter where the money came from or what the person intended. It wasn’t their money anymore. It was the money of the person who requested donations, and they could do with it whatever they wanted. What we’re trying to do here is convince that person to change the way they spend their money so that they don’t end up dead in a ditch or a drug den within the next few years. Because that would be a bad outcome and we’d prefer to see a better outcome for our comrades.
Yes, and what I am saying is that Hexbear does not have the power to help this person by changing the rules of this comm. Your criticism cannot touch anything you gleamed from them by their posting on this site because every day they are out there fighting for survival unhoused.
Ultimately Hexbear is not a crisis service, we have very little avenue for directing change in this persons life other than supporting their claimed efforts to live a healthier life. You can choose to not believe they are genuine and stop donating, but there is nothing Hexbear can do but ban them on the basis of speculation. What does that solve? All we can do is lend support in whichever ways we can, and one of those ways is by giving them spare cash.
EXCELLENT post
GOOD post
Unsolicited advice from Internet randos is probably the least effective form of “aid.” Why would anyone consider or care what a stranger has to say?
Realistically, outside of money, people in a public anonymous forum could:
-
Pretend to be job references for people applying for jobs.
-
Help people pass certification exams or even do their homework.
That’s pretty much it.
I personally think this comm should be more geared towards raising funds for any gofundmes, not just for people from this website. There’s so many gofundmes from Palestinians, and it’s kinda weird that we don’t have a sticky about it. There’s an entire website dedicated to vetting those gofundmes: https://gazafunds.com/. If you think they’re all scams or whatever, there’s a gofundme by the municipality of Gaza itself: https://gaza-city.ensany.com/campaign/6737
Yes, not all anonymous randos asking for money on a public anonymous forum actually need the money, which is why this comm should be geared towards gofundmes that can be vetted on some level. All those “uh aktually I don’t want to give you money because you’re a junkie who will blow the money on drugs” whiners can be redirected to donate to the Gazan gofundme instead.
Good idea, but this comm should still be open to regular users too, can’t forget about them. This comm has helped me so much in tight spots and generally speaking it seems the same for most users. I tend to think people coming here for help do need it.
Outside of that we do from time to time get posts raising money for indigenous comrades.
I don’t have a problem with gofundmes or anything, but I feel like that kinda thing falls into charity and not mutual aid. Still good of course, but different. (which opens up the conversation of if an internet forum can even be effective mutual aid but that’s off topic)
I don’t have a problem with people asking for money they don’t need, lying, using all their money on drugs, idc. I’m just asking that conversations be allowed to happen when they happen. Even if the OP ignores the criticisms entirely, it brings engagement to a persons post, which might potentially get more people interested in supporting them.
-
Taking care of a persons needs is always priority #1, but at times, said person is unfit to handle money in a way that reliably alleviates those needs.
this has been on my mind a lot but I don’t think there’s really a good way to articulate my thoughts or a good solution for it, it’s just hard for me to wrap my head around someone posting
spoiler because I'm not trying to call out a specific person but I mean, it's kind of a specific instance and might be recognized
about getting like literally two months’ worth of my wages as a donation and then asking for more money a week later, like
I guess I feel a mix of jealousy, disbelief, and just like loss by proxy that this mana from heaven seemed to just disappear without benefit lasting even longer than a week
but i’m going to shut up about it because I’m not trying to be an asshole, it’s just like, idk, really wack to me that that happened
I feel similarly. It really stung.
I’ve given people money through here from time to time, and this definitely made me less likely to do so in the future
Absolutely, the flippancy some users have with our comrades’ hard work is really disappointing. To say that $4k is some miniscule amount of money, or being like “actually I spent hundreds of dollars on doordash
” wtfI don’t think anyone is genuinely thinking or saying that in a smug tone (except tbf maybe this specific incident because it appears they’re also a bigot and possibly a scammer). Anyone spending hundreds on DoorDash because they actually want to, and not as some sort of weird scammer power play, is probably either not thinking through their financial decisions entirely or has some other reason to do so that isn’t malicious or even purposely dismissive of the people that donated to them.
I don’t think you should pretend it’s only “kind of” a specific incident. We literally all know who you mean and saying you’re going to shut up about it and then posting it anyhow doesn’t really change what you’ve said. Not that you shouldn’t have said anything, clearly you aren’t the only one to feel off about it, but don’t pretend it can be anonymized, it’s just subtweeting.
I don’t know what, if anything, should be done, but I also don’t see how a rule that didn’t exist when that happened is a factor.
This comm is ultimately 95% just charity for people in our little online community. I still think that’s a good thing on the whole, but I think we all would prefer if it could be a more structured form of aid, but it can’t unless people organize a structure (and mods allow it ig).
idk I just tried to do what I could to semi anonymize it while still gripe about it and give an opportunity for someone to not read about it, idk what else I coulda done other than say nothing :/
I don’t know what, if anything, should be done, but I also don’t see how a rule that didn’t exist when that happened is a factor.
yeah I wasn’t trying to say whatever rule change happened was a factor, I just thought to mention it because of the part I quoted from the OP because idk when else, if ever, it’d be appropriate to mention. I don’t want to make a post about it y’know
This comm is ultimately 95% just charity for people in our little online community. I still think that’s a good thing on the whole, but I think we all would prefer if it could be a more structured form of aid
I mean I agree, this place is a truly bright light in an otherwise bleak present, and although I’m not in a position to really help out others I am so grateful to see the help that’s been given
I just really wish in this case that money could have gotten this person into a better situation for at least a month or two
I just really wish in this case that money could have gotten this person into a better situation for at least a month or two
Yeah, I’m sure they wished for that too. Idk what griping does to help them or anyone else is all, besides make them feel bad. A one time cash infusion is good but its not enough to overhaul a life, to overcome all the barriers put in front of a person. I don’t really have a point here I guess.
Edit: EelBolshevism put it better above.
If you needed that money, you are free to ask for support as well. If you don’t need it, then why do you care where it went? its not your money nor are you seeking similar donations. Straight up if I became homeless I’d be fucked. I’d probably just die. I have like every leg up in the world but I still can’t kick any of my bad habits even when they’re self destructive. If I got an influx of money I’d 100% spend it on fast food or something. And people would judge the fuck out of me for it. I do more indulgent shit than that now, but nobody judges me because I didn’t have to beg for that money, I work a job. But I don’t deserve this any more than anyone else, I’m stuck in the same mental rut but with different life circumstances. And so unless/until there’s a program that’s going to care for homeless people outside of capitalism, giving them shit is a standby to keep them afloat at least, and if they are lucky, maybe a leg up and out (but that can’t be an expectation, they have to be ready to change and its pretty hard to get your shit together when you don’t have reliable food and shelter)
it’s just that it was like a lot of fuckin’ money? and
100% spend it on fast food or something
literally years worth of that???
like I don’t blame someone for spending on vices, I am just saying that yes, here, I don’t think this person was the best steward of $4k+ dollars if it evaporated in a week, which is the basis of what I originally quoted and replied to
Hope this helps as like an insight, but this person your talking about clearly lives amongst some kind of irl community of other unhoused people. No one suddenly smokes up even $1000 dollars worth of meth in three weeks, so get that thought out of your head if anything like that was on your mind. It’s not a stretch to imagine a lot of it going toward others in their offline life. For unhoused people, these communities are very transitory in that people appear and disappear fast, but they all have the same solidarity from being unhoused. Multiple times this user has mentioned helping out other unhoused people with money donated.
I’m convinced it’s either an example of an outright scammer, in which case we’re trying to make it all about personal responsibility for no reason when the actual problem is we got scammed. Or it’s an example of something else going on we don’t know about. Because like you said, randomly blowing 4000$ on basically anything I can think of is extremely difficult. Especially because of the amount.
Only thing I can think of that wouldn’t result in SOMETHING at least a LITTLE helpful to their situation (like a car or products they could resell or just use) would be gambling, and that’s its own kind of addiction. But because there’s no mention of gambling or gambling addiction (something I really hope people would sympathize with), it feels really likely they’re just a scammer who appears to also be a bigot, and this seems like a classic example of people compromising their beliefs and practices because they think they can “get ahead” of a troll or scammer by doing so. A good secondary example of stuff like this is when people assume someone with neopronouns is a troll, and when someone actually is a troll using neopronouns, they point to it as proof of their assumptions all along. When the best option is actually to just ban them or, possible in this case, pursue outright legal action if they truly are just a scammer who doesn’t need any of this money and is funneling it off somewhere.
I would be very careful using the word scammer this lightly. And if this actually even is storyofrachel (I have not personally seen the evidence of this yet, but I do admit this would be very uncanny similarity if this were just a coincidence).
No one else who sent money in small amounts could have been deceived because this money was sent on the basis that this user is homeless, and has unmet basic needs that money can help them fulfill. This is true regardless of anything else this user may have lied about or did under different accounts.
The queerphobic comments made by storyofrachel that originally got her banned are disappointing and, it would be unfortunate to learn this is the same user. But remember this is a young, unhoused, trans person themself. Those comments were made years ago, and nothing like that has ever happened again since. I’m personally willing to forgive them, but I understand anyone who else who is not. But since this is all speculation, it would be unfeasible to make a case for getting them on ban evasion.
Ultimately none of that makes them a scammer, though. They are a genuine member of Hexbear and I have seen them posting normally for at least six months under their current account.
EDIT: Almost forgot to address the $4000, lol. If anyone was scammed, it was the person who sent this all at once. That was just one donation, and we don’t have anyone coming out claiming they were scammed. Without someone reporting they were scammed, it’s hard to make the case that this was a scamming. That’s why I think this whole incident should just be shelved for now.
For what it’s worth the rule specifically says no unsolicited advice or critical comments in the mutual aid post.
You are welcome to make a separate post about it like this one while following the code of conduct as well as not pinging the person to harass them.
It is a good clarification, thanks!
If you drop a few thousand bucks into a homeless addict’s lap and expect them to snap their fingers and magically get all their shit together, you’re as naive as a toddler. Of course a chunk of it is going to go towards vices and self-care. What were you expecting? “Ah yes, this has immediately solved all my problems, let me put down a security deposit on a condo and invest the remainder in my 401k.”
Sending a stranger money on the Internet is very rarely going to solve anything other their immediate, base level needs. I’m not saying it isn’t helpful (and it is in fact extremely cool), but expecting a shot of cash to be as transformative or revolutionary as a real life mutual aid network is magical thinking.
If you drop a few thousand bucks into a homeless addict’s lap and expect them to snap their fingers and magically get all their shit together, you’re as naive as a toddler.
Haven’t there been city and state programs that do almost exactly this and found that, broadly, they are pretty successful and improved the living conditions of most recipients?
there’s a difference between something having a statistically positive effect on most recipients, and being able to outright expect that positive effect from a single instance
Oh no I understand that, but I think saying “just dropping money in a homeless persons lap WONT fix their problems” is maybe reinforcing certain turbo lib, anti-public assistance talking points.
In reality, dropping money in their laps often CAN HELP, potentially a lot. Not always but it clearly often does and hence such programs are a good thing even if there are certain individuals for whom that assistance alone isn’t enough.
I think the point is that money almost always helps, but it isn’t a transactional thing when you give money to someone asking for aid. You aren’t actually owed correct behavior from them or for them to recover and have a better life (this doesn’t mean scammers pretending to be in need are good, either, just that those asking in good faith shouldn’t be judged for their decisions with money given to them willingly with full information). But
Counterpoint: giving needy people money does not entitle you to anything in return. If you are going to be weird about it - don’t give money. Miss everyone with the paternalistic nonsense.
Edit: and for the record I have given money to someone who was almost definitely scamming and I never mentioned it to anyone. Giving money anonymously is exactly what it says on the tin.
It’s not a matter of entitlement, its a matter of making sure peoples needs are met. That is the entire point of mutual aid. Throwing money at problems indiscriminately is not a solution. If you feel like giving someone money, give someone money. That is not what this post is about.
Somewhat understandable but you are advocating for witch trials instead of an outright ban which would be a much more sensible solution… which leads me to believe you haven’t thought this through at all or aren’t serious.
If it makes you ideologically mad that resources aren’t being perfectly allocated or whatever… Maybe unsubscribe from the comm or at least propose a solution with some thought behind it. Jesus.
you are advocating for witch trials
Who is advocating for witch trials and where did they advocate such a thing?
Ok are we going to appoint someone to vet everyone’s claims or what. This is what I mean. Not a serious solution.
I feel like you have no idea of the context of this discussion and are just trying to stir shit. No one is talking about vetting claims.
I’m sure I don’t know the context. Everyone should if we are discussing something important.
How is it advocating for witch trials? As far as I’m aware this wasn’t even perceived as a problem until a 1 off situation. That 1 off situation being highly controversial in this community. I would rather people talk these things over and actively learn from each other, than to blanket ban criticism. Criticism is not inherently malicious, and its not saying “don’t send money to this person” (and saying this IS wrong).
This is an online community, it has very little capacity to help, but one of the ways it can help is through conversations. Limiting the type of conversation, limits that capacity further. That is the point I am making.
As far as I’m aware this wasn’t even perceived as a problem until a 1 off situation. That 1 off situation being highly controversial in this community.
You’d be wrong there, a similar situation with the same user (to my knowledge) being involved that happened at the start of hexbear/chapo.chat and a bunch of users got banned, including the user people donated/gave the money to. It’s been ongoing since the chapotraphouse subreddit days.
Thanks for the info!
Removed by mod
It really seems like you have entirely missed their point, to be honest. All they’re advocating for is a rule change to facilitate discussion, not in any way trying to identify liars.
I am not trying to regulate anything
I am saying literally the opposite. Don’t regulate what anyone has to say in critique of another person (unless its obviously malicious).
So you need to either tell me how you are going to verify people’s claims or how you are going to protect against social engineering that reddit-like sites are famous for. It literally isn’t possible. All the claims are true or they aren’t. This isn’t complicated.
This is a wild point to argue when you literally admitted not having context
I’m not trying to do any of that at all. What do you think I’m advocating for? I think something is lost in translation.
Where in any post are they advocating for vetting? You have a really strong opinion about something everyone already agrees with but somehow that means you disagree with their point of offering advice instead of just money?
-
Somebody asks for a few bucks for some ramen.
-
The same somebody is pretty open about their use and/or addiction to things on the same forums that they’ve asked for a few bucks
-
Commenters chirp about “not being an addict” and “don’t give money to this person because they are probably going to use it for drugs”
I’m hoping this is what the rule is in reference to. Could also be comfortable with it being in reference to comments telling them to go find a food pantry or shelter etc.etc. when they weren’t asking for helping finding or navigating those services.
I am 99% positive, nobody is asking to vet the user who’s asking for ramen money if, in fact, they are going to be using it for ramen instead of drugs or booze or socks or something.
-
Why the fuck is today suddenly Transphobia Day on hexbear
I’ve been able to help people get housing here for free before. Though not on this comm specifically, people DM me and I hook them up with people I know that have extra space.
That’s good to hear!
where we all pretend that personal responsibility doesn’t exist
Communism is when mom brushes my teeth.
how is someone making their own mom brush their teeth remotely comparable to a poor person spending their meager funds on a luxury so they have a small tiny spark of joy in their lives
I don’t know the context for this, but I think with the status quo of the internet being that everyone shits on homeless people, drug addicts, etc. I can understand wanting to remove comments that are being critical of the decisions someone has made that led to them asking for help here. There is a time and place for offering advice, and most of the time people here are not looking for it nor are they even in a position to hear it, and they are definitely not going to take much in from strangers. In healthcare settings it takes hours of building rapport to broach these topics, so unless you know the user well its pretty much pointless to be critical of someone unless you want to make them feel like shit. At best you could link people to resources that could help, or invest the hours to get to know them, then start trying to give advice.
I do think if this comm is going to be called mutual aid then there should be more than just posts requesting donations… though it can’t be as bad as the languagelearning comm not having stickied resources for learning languages
A fair point. I would hope that people on a leftist forum wouldn’t immediately gun someone down just for being homeless or a drug addict. The context for this post without getting too into detail is that a person in this community got around 4k in donations, and pissed it away. People criticized them for asking for more, then they made an apology post, where plenty of people (including me) still criticized and offered advice. Then the admin made the post with the rule change.
I’m arguing that hard conversations need to happen sometimes, and in that situation, a hard conversation was needed. Obviously people can take things to far, but there is a difference between malice and good criticism, and I’m suggesting that criticism be allowed with situations like this in mind.
It’s a common conservative trope to bring up people who will abuse any form of social aid. They focus on how some undeserving lazy people will “hack” the system of that aid, driving attention from the benefit of that aid even if some do actually abuse it. Being critical in the posts would not shame the people who do that, it might drive away people who actually need aid. Speaking from a personal experience, I only ask for help after I beat myself up enough and it’s not the time for me listen to a lecture. I’ve never asked for money online like this and finding this community actually surprises me and gives me hope. I once summoned d enough courage to ask a friend for help, not much money, just a loan to buy enough food. They ended up lecturing me about things I already know. What’s worse is that they live in Europe and I am in a “third world country” suffering from health issues that make it hard for me to work consistently. I was already so depressed but the lecturing made it much worse and confirmed all the blame I blame msyelf all the time. This made me not ask for anything anymore, and I saw that the world is so dark that even a few bucks to save your life wouldn’t be given by a friend. I am of course open to improve in any way but not when I am feeling so down and need to find food. I am much better now and can manage food and rent and necessities. But I still get a bad feeling from that lecture. It’s the feeling that if things go wrong for me I might just die because no one cares.
Id care, comrade. I’m sorry a “friend” kicked you when you were down
Thank you, comrade. That’s good to know. The loneliness that came from that feeling is somehow worse than not having money. We all should have people who care in our lives.
personal responsibility
Is it lib of me, that when I find someone deprived of what they need to survive, I’m more inclined to try and find local resources that could be more sustainable? If I hear someone is starving, money is nice but how about knowledge of a place where you can get a free lunch and dinner every day? Or even a free weekly food box? Shelters generally suck, but I feel compelled to at least be like “check out these ones if you haven’t, they’re a little better.”
It’s the social worker in me. Some folks just need a couple bucks to pay some intractible cost like rent or medicine, but if someone is dealing with structural poverty, they probably need structural supports yeah?
I worry that it would come off as condescending to be like “hey I’m not gonna give you any money, but Sisters is open for lunch rn and Sunshine has open food box sign ups. Do you need any help signing up for Medicaid and food stamps?”
Should I self crit about this?
If you genuinely can’t provide any money but can provide your labor by finding resources for someone, that’s cool and good.
If you have the option of providing money in addition to those resources and choose not to, id do some self crit on why you’re opposed to giving desperate people money that you can spare
But yeah, the resources are definitely useful in the long run and it would be very kind of you to provide that aid, comrade
The solution to any person you think is abusing this community is to point it out to a Hexbear admin or moderator. I assure you they are active, even on this comm, and have thought long and hard about the rules, they just do not make their presence known as much as they did historically on Hexbear. If they disagree, feel free to point it out in a post, but after the community consensus lands on no harm done? At that point is where the solution to said problem user being distasteful for you is to donate to something else and block the comm for a while. It is not your problem, nor does it become your problem because the few bucks you sent them didn’t totally transform their life. It’s also not your problem if others disagree and continue to help, it’s all confined to this comm, no one who doesn’t want to see this has to see it.
Here’s my personal experience as a person who fortunately received money during crisis from comrades on this comm:
The first time was after I had to turn down a scab job offer while running out of money. I was on the verge of homelessness at that point, and could no longer afford my Buprenorphine prescription, which my life and ability to function on a daily basis depends on. That was my first post in c/mutual_aid. My Hexbear account is four years old. I was there during the first three days of the site’s existence and the entirety of the lifeboat discord before that. All under this account, which admittedly gives me an unfair advantage, but that novelty wears off quickly.
I got 120 dollars within a day of posting, enough for a two month supply of Buprenorphine. Every single cent went to that. This was urgent for me, people with similar experiences donated money to me because they understand what this is like. They almost certainly looked over my post history, and that was enough for them to trust I’m not a scammer because Hexbear is still a small enough site that communities can form where most people recognize each other from their time spent browsing.
I don’t believe anyone would say that was problematic given I followed all the rules of this comm. That includes keeping all mutual_aid posts and discussion in c/mutual_aid. Since we can either sort by local or sort by all and block this community, no one who wants to think about this stuff need know who’s even using the comm for help because they wouldn’t have to see the posts made in their feed.
Later on, I found I had my Buprenorphine all taken care of, but had no money for food that I could access. So I asked for $50 dollars for one to two weeks worth of groceries. By then my situation had started to stabilize and was on the up swing. I had luckily found a new job sooner than I had expected, but was flat broke and the first check was still weeks out. I just didn’t have enough money for some basic self care and food, and that’s the amount I thought would do me well for one to two weeks. I made a second post, but with less elaboration and detail on my situation, had a relaxed tone to show it wasn’t urgent, and simply asked if anyone could help out. I only got twenty dollars, but there were more dire ongoing situations and spare money is finite. And that’s also a fine outcome! They helped a comrade they related to with what money they could spare to that, it’s no problem, it feels good to help people in hard situations. That was still very helpful!
What I’m getting at is that for anyone on this comm that donates, it is an informed decision made because they have money to spare and another person needs it more. You don’t do this to change someone with money you expect to lose because no one is perfect. You already knew it wouldn’t be enough to permanently change their situation, so how can you, a person who has never met them give criticism about their spending via this narrow look into their life? And for that same reason, why do you believe any of your criticism is applicable to their problems just because you sent them a few bucks and read a few of their posts? You ultimately still do not owe them anything, nor do they owe you anything. The relationship between aid giver and receiver is never transactional. You can’t just toss people out of this community because you imposed on them some will to change their lives after sending them any amount of money discussed here.
On the other end of things, donating to someone on c/mutual_aid cannot be enabling as it is typically understood. The rules of this comm enforce a boundary in that no one can make or discuss these mutual aid requests outside of this comm. Which means there is a very easy means of setting boundaries preventing two people from forming toxic relationships involving donations and expectations of behavior. Just giving money to a grown adult known to have a drug problem cannot be considered enabling because regardless of their addiction, they need money to merely exist! If you stop giving them money, they do not necessarily stop using drugs, they find money elsewhere because they also need it to eat, find shelter, and take care of their other basic needs. Can your small donation make them quit their vices? No? Don’t be surprised if they use some or all of it for their vices. Enabling requires the presence of the type of a relationship precluded by the way the rules are enforced on this comm.
None of this changes just because the dollar amount is in the low thousands. That was a single donation made by someone who clearly had money to spare. You can not know what any of that actually entailed, and you are projecting paranoia onto this comm as a result.
So ultimately I have to say:
is to point it out to a Hexbear admin or moderator. I assure you they are active, even on this comm, and have thought long and hard about the rules, they just do not make their presence known as much as they did historically on Hexbear.
There is a lot of discussion going on right now. That’s all I’m gonna say about it.
Also while I’m gonna encourage the use of the report button to bring matters to our attention, please don’t use it as an “I disagree button”
Also while I’m gonna encourage the use of the report button to bring matters to our attention, please don’t use it as an “I disagree button”
Definitely! I hope nothing in my comment implied I meant to imply I recommend that, could you elaborate on what part of my comment you’re responding to?
it’s just a general comment to everyone. I think the only exception to it - on the comms I’m on that is, don’t do this to anyone else - is hitting the report button to share a funny bit or crafting an elaborate prank to get one-up on the mods.
For the record, I’m also okay with sharing a funny bit or tagline request on communities I moderate.
Also in agreement, the report button shouldn’t be for letting us know you spilled your jice or in place of a downbear.
Oh ok! I just thought it might have in response to me directly since its in reply to the start of my big comment.
Yeah, there’s a huge difference between judging someone for making bad financial decisions, and choosing to donate to a different person because you know your money won’t make a dent due to their spending, or because you know/they said it’s low priority
That’s totally fair. Was considering blocking this group because it’s stressful watching so many down on their luck people asking for money. It was putting me on [more of ] a doomer path in a sort of learned helplessness way.
I totally get that, and that’s why a big rule here is that this is the only place on the entire site where people are allowed to make these kinds of requests for money or help. Since lemmy allows you to block individual communities, no one need any engagement here they don’t want. If you block the community, you’ll still see the regular posts from users that frequent it, but you’ll never even know they do it because the rules preclude bringing it up elsewhere.
This requirement is the main reason a block button for communities was implemented into lemmy in the first place, and as a result we see this community thriving only after that boundary become solidified. It’s a step closer to getting a coherent system of informed content warnings going.
“excuse me, but I was looking to donate to a homeless who was good with money. skill issue.”
“you are fiscally irresponsible, therefore you deserve to starve”
Nobody said that.
nobody “says” that they hate black people or gay people when they start JAQing off
How I felt in the original post seems to have resonated with a fairly significant amount of people here, so this was obviously a much needed discussion. While I appreciated the very long comment you posted previously (and even edited my post to mention you) you’re just flat out being bad faith here.
Sorry, yeah, it’s an accusatory tone in my comment, though I don’t mean it at you. I don’t necessarily think YOU’RE saying anything bad or trying to be bad-faith at all. I’m trying to explain why I don’t like the idea of people being allowed to criticize posters in this comm, even for benign things or for good reasons. It isn’t you who is “JAQing off” in my metaphor, it’s some theoretically future person doing it with the lack of a rule as pretext to do so
You did not say it but plenty of people have who are not you and are likely to in the future (I wasn’t directing at you with my mocking either. You literally didn’t say anything close to it; Others have though and I saw it as an opportunity to make fun of them)
