Support Australia!

[Mavrias]

I just don't see where a mount comes to play in this? If you want to help out just donate to an actual charity. I don't see why you need a carrot.

[ausanimal]

I just don't see where a mount comes to play in this? If you want to help out just donate to an actual charity. I don't see why you need a carrot.

The mount was just a idea for SE to get behind helping Australia by bringing in a mount that people could buy and the money went to a charity to help, there is nothing wrong with that at all someone suggestion a idea that SE could get behind, i'm surprised the amount off people that see it as a bad idea be it you donate to a charity or buy a mount and the money is still going to a charity you just end up with a mount. No matter which one someone picks the money still ends up going to a charity to help out.

[Mavrias]

The mount was just a idea for SE to get behind helping Australia by bringing in a mount that people could buy and the money went to a charity to help, there is nothing wrong with that at all someone suggestion a idea that SE could get behind, i'm surprised the amount off people that see it as a bad idea be it you donate to a charity or buy a mount and the money is still going to a charity you just end up with a mount. No matter which one someone picks the money still ends up going to a charity to help out.

You could pay Square $30 for a mount and have maybe $15 go to support relief efforts or just donate $30 to the charity and have all of it go to relief efforts. That's personally why I think the mount is a bad idea.

[NessaWyvern]

You could pay Square $30 for a mount and have maybe $15 go to support relief efforts or just donate $30 to the charity and have all of it go to relief efforts. That's personally why I think the mount is a bad idea.

Or have something like WoW does, and have ALL the money go to charity.

[Mavrias]

Or have something like WoW does, and have ALL the money go to charity.

There's a big asterisk that says Blizzard donates a maximum of USD $3 million from sales of their charity pet (the Dottie pet and plush of 2019).

[frostmagemari]

There's a big asterisk that says Blizzard donates a maximum of USD $3 million from sales of their charity pet (the Dottie pet and plush of 2019).

They've always had a limit to their donation and considering that they've never reached that $3mil USD in since the launch of the very first charity pet; Yes, it can be said that they donate all the money to charity.

[Tatiana]

There's a big asterisk that says Blizzard donates a maximum of USD $3 million from sales of their charity pet (the Dottie pet and plush of 2019).

That's fine, if they even reach that limit it's still donating $3 Million that the organization/people/situation in need didn't have before. I see no problem with doing something like this, and I think it would be a pretty good idea although probably a charity pet would be more realistic, and not a mount.

[Jojoya]

The mount was just a idea for SE to get behind helping Australia by bringing in a mount that people could buy and the money went to a charity to help, there is nothing wrong with that at all someone suggestion a idea that SE could get behind, i'm surprised the amount off people that see it as a bad idea be it you donate to a charity or buy a mount and the money is still going to a charity you just end up with a mount. No matter which one someone picks the money still ends up going to a charity to help out.

So why not cut out the middle man and just donate directly to the charity?

The real problem here is the people thinking they should get something in return for donating to a charity. At that point, you're no longer donating to help out a cause. You're making a purchase and using the charity as an excuse to try to make yourself feel better about it.

[LaylaTsarra]

So why not cut out the middle man and just donate directly to the charity?

People who want to donate will do that. There are though incentives that help people donate who wouldn't normally. A mount is a carrot yes and if SE were to make one lots of people would end up buying it and as a result the donations would be much larger than they would be otherwise.

It was a suggestion for SE to enable a revenue source that would most likely never happen without it as an incentive.

[ausanimal]

So why not cut out the middle man and just donate directly to the charity?

The real problem here is the people thinking they should get something in return for donating to a charity. At that point, you're no longer donating to help out a cause. You're making a purchase and using the charity as an excuse to try to make yourself feel better about it.

No one is saying that the only way to donate to a charity is if they bring out the mount plus no one knows how much SE would keep or if they would donate the whole amount, the problem is people have a closed mind when they are looking at things. Take donations here in Australia if you donate over a certain amount you can claim it on your tax return now by your thinking people are only donating so come tax time they have one more thing to claim not the fact that the ATO wants receipts for everything so if you donate $500 to a charity you need that receipt for when you claim so they know where your money was spent.

By your logic streamers that take part in rising money for St Jude are only doing it for the items that they may get if they reach high enough donations and the chance to go to St Jude the following year and look behind the scenes, where i see it as a one off the biggest community's coming together to rise money for a great cause and that's what happened. Streamers even put up incentives if they reach a goal or would do something for the right donation i.e bean boozled and it worked to rise the 8 mil for St Jude, So having something people can get be it a mount knowing that say all the money went to charity what is wrong with that more people might be inclined to buy the mount to donate to charity then if they were to just donate to the charity.