Friends not sponsoring dh

Chuggers, of course, are not in the least serious about the issues. They are serious about the comission they get for raising money for different charities every day.

Unfortunately charities feel that people won't do the "in your face" stuff unless they give those people something in return - be that 10% of the direct debits they manage to sign up, a free trip to Kilimanjaro, or the kudos of posting on Facebook what a great person you are for raising x amount.

No. Absolutely you have the wrong end of the stick. I think many people would feel this was a brush off and that like the seeming majority of people on the thread they preferred not to participate but didn't want to say so to your face.

I mean - I would judge it based on the conversation/demeanour of the person.

When I've been sent these things there is a link to the charity and quite a bit of detail about why the person is doing it. I would assume that they could click a website link if they wanted to? If it's a much lesser known one and they did seem genuinely interested I'd share.

(Maybe I've been in Britain too long? Or maybe in my experience a US person would say no this way? Yanks are not as direct as they appear.)

I've never done anything sponsored and have no plans to.

But there must be many, many people who quietly donate to charities every week/month? I do and I imagine others do the same, pick the charities that they feel close to and want to support - and off they go.

That is the equivalence of running with arms open, isn't it? But without the annoying chugger!

I'm not saying it's wrong or it's right. I'm just pointing out raising funds for charity is by its very nature aggressive and persistent. Nobody runs with outstretched arms and open wallets towards chuggers and sponsored activities do they?

If you're serious about raising money for the issue you care about, you get in people's faces. If you're limply posting a link on facebook every quarter, nobody will see it.

The sponsorship is a want not a need, amd if the link were sent every week, she'd be blocked by me.

That would make total sense to me

I think people including OP are taking this far too personally. The world does not revolve around our fascinating lives, moral crusades, whatsapp groups and Gofundme links. Most people don't care either way, they have their own problems.

Sometimes I sponsor, sometimes I don't. I don't have a personal axe to grind - it all depends on whether I received the message during a commute / busy time / quiet moment, whether the charity is one I would support, how close the friends are, whether they've supported me, my current mood, whether it stands out in the million messages that pop up when I scroll, whether I've just had to pay for a new boiler or just got a new freelance contract, if it's at Christmas - no chance. There are millions of factors.

I have done fundraising and crowdfunding for local causes (all voluntary ones, no £100k CEOs involved) and you have to tell people at least 10 times before they donate because it's just noise and another to do for their list. If you're going to ask for sponsorship you need to have a thicker skin than this.

Sending the link twice in 'months' - that's not going to get you anywhere. You need to ask in person and send at least every week.

But if you just support the cause they are fundraising for, and not their sponsored event, isn't that just as good as far as they are concerned?

Why? You'd only be doing what I asked you to do. All I've said is that if I give money, I want to check where it's going. The fact that you would see that the same as "No" speaks volumes about the way people look at sponsorship.

I can't understand why anyone would say "Oh, charity? Sure!" when everyone knows there are many charities that are incompetent, corrupt, or aimed at purposes they don't actually support.

If your cause is good wouldn't you think "Yes, when they see it, they might give something"? Or don't you really care, if the money isn't directed through you?

It obviously depends on why they are raising money. If it's for the school playground or something only for the school then it's of no benefit to me and never will be so I don't really care about it. If someone, adult or child, is raising money for a cause such as MND, MS or cancer research then far more people can potentially benefit.

I think that people who sponsor others are more likely to do so for kids because they're kids, whether they have thoughts on the charity involved or not. I've certainly done that for not wanting to disappoint a child - for no deeper reason than that.

What's wrong though is if you court sponsorship for your children for whatever they're doing then not returning the favour is going to case bad feeling. The way around that is to fund whatever your children are asking for, yourself, without recourse to other people. Then you're free and clear of obligation to sponsor other people because you've never asked for it yourself.

They’re not mutually exclusive - if you sponsor someone you support the cause that they’re fundraising for.
As a PP has said, it’s not that deep.

I would see this as a gentle and very polite way of saying you're not interested and very likely leave you alone.

This is not about the cause - this is about the ego of the dh and the friends who are expected to prop it up.

I usually throw something on, how much depends on how close and the cause, if it was a mutual friend with a condition and another mutual friend running I'd be generous.

Here's a little thing people can try.

When asked for sponsorship, say "Can you send me the details of the charity; I will have a look at it and give directly if I think it's worthwhile. Sorry, that's what I always do before giving to charity."

Now, I fully understand that people might think "Well, they won't give." It's quite likely I won't. But the cost of sending me the details is zero, and so if the person is genuinely concerned about the cause, sending me the details for the 5% chance I might give is well worth while.

I imagine most people can guess how many sponsorship seekers actually do send me the details in such cases.

That's right. None.

Everything you are saying indicates that you see this as far more about the people asking for sponsorship than about the causes.

That's why a lot of people don't like the whole thing.

They’ve not taken money but have taken the OP’s kindness toward sponsoring their kids. Is it difficult to expect that at least some of them would extend same to her/DH?

The event is a school thing. The cause could be anything.

Why do you assume "an adult running a marathon" will necessarily be for a cause that is "of benefit to the wider public" and school event won't be?

Or, she has supported some charities. Presumably, the people raising the sponsorship weren't making money from it, the charity was (she's claimed this was the case with her, so I'll assume it's true of the others).

Why do you see sponsoring someone as giving to the person rather than giving to the underlying cause? How can they be "takers" if they passed all the money on?

Is it just all about showing off how much you have raised?

Right, so she’s sponsored friends’ kids but shouldn’t expect same friends to support her Dh?

Like I’ve said, takers…

I have read it! Kids, not adults!

What use is a 'school thing' to anyone outside the school? I'd rather sponsor an adult running a marathon than some kid raising money that will never have any benefit for the wider public.

I never sponsor anything. Neither would I ask anyone to sponsor me. If I want to donate money to a good cause, I will just do that. No need to shave my head, run round the garden or anything else pointless.

The ones that annoy me most are the bungee/parachute jumps and Zipwire bollocks. A lot of the time it's a con to get other people to pay for an expensive activity you want to do and has little to do with raising money.

If anyone asks you to sponsor them doing anything expensive, make sure you find out who is paying for the activity.

A few years ago, a woman at work was asking people for money to do a bungee jump. It turned out that the cost of doing the jump came out of the sponsorship money. As the money pledged only just covered the cost of the jump, the charity got almost nothing. She was happy enough. She got her bungee jump paid for. Her colleagues felt very let down when they found out.

@StrikeAlways - Read the OP. She’s often sponsored friends’ kids and have had no response from these friends.

People happy to take but not give.