to not get the pointless tasks that people want you to sponsor them to do

[SlightlyJaded]

So this isn't really about the endless stream of 'sponsor this, sponsor that' - you know - 'my best friends neighbour is friends with a man who is going to jump in a river in New Zealand, can you sponsor him?'. That's a whole other thread

No the thing I don't get is why the 'task' that you get sponsored to do, is always so pointless.

Sponsored swim - who actually benefits from the swim? Nobody
Sponsored climb/run/walk - ditto
At DCs school: Sponsored 'bounce' on a jumpy castle, sponored silence, sponsored wee anything. JUST SPONSOR IT!

And especially Sponsored Jump out of a plane

I get it when it's en masse - the London Marathon.

But when it's a few people, why doesn't the task relate to the fundraising? Why not:

'sponsored bake and give the cake to the local soup kitchen?'
'sponsored build a new school in Africa instead of 'climbing the mountain' seeing as you're over there to raise funds to build the school'
'Sponsored decorate the library' (seeing as you are raising funds to decorate the library in the first place)

And so on and so forth.

This is quite a lazy AIMU. I haven't really thought it through, but I have always been vaguely about the pointlessness of the tasks, no matter how good the cause.

YANBU.

YABU - i am doing a swim for cancer research - if you could sponsor me to find a cure i'd happily do it

I have often thought the same thing. And posted it on MN but nobody listened to me

YABU. Talents and causes you wish to support don't always coincide.

E.G. I could be a prof. mountaineer and not a builder, so I'll raise money using my talent for the builder to do it.

YABU

If someone could build a new school/bake a cake they would, if they can't they will do something else they enjoy and raise funds that way.

who beneifts from the swim, walk, run - well the person doing the swim, run or walk as they will have to train and therefore get fitter. Then the money raised goes towards research, though that part is dubious and I know there are plenty of opinions on whether it is the right type of research.

I would rather bake cakes and sell the cakes and then give the money to which ever charity or sports club I wish. So this is what I do instead.

Yabu. The charity involved benefits of course. The last sponsored silence at our school raised over £1000. The hospice benefitted and as an aside the kids got quite a bit of work done. (The ones in ds class did anyway)

*who beneifts from the swim, walk, run - well the person doing the swim, run or walk as they will have to train and therefore get fitter. Then the money raised goes towards research, though that part is dubious and I know there are plenty of opinions on whether it is the right type of research.

I would rather bake cakes and sell the cakes and then give the money to which ever charity or sports club I wish. So this is what I do instead.*

What's the difference between you giving your money to charity and the cyclist/swimmer/whatever giving theirs to charity? You have no more say in what it's used for than they do? I do not understand your post?

YonWhaleFish - the Op said the swimmmer, runner or walker etc didn't benefit form the activity - but I think they do benefit and they give money to the charity that they have raised.

I don't want to swim so I make cakes instead and give the proceeds to charity or whichever good cause.

Everyone is different and will raise money in different ways, and I don't see that the task is pointless whether it is swimming, baking or jumping out of a plane

I see! I was really confused for a minute as to whether you were agreeing with the OP or not! emoticon.

I've done the london bikeathon a couple of times. Great fun....helped me get fitter and was all for a good cause....

Charities depend on sponsored events....and I for one am happy to take part and support others doing something for a good cause.

I think what you have OP is compassion fatigue!

But yon if you're a professional mountaineer why would you need sponsoring? Thought the point of sponsoring was to take you out of comfort zone to do soemthing that u wouldn't usually do. Plus somethig that bears some relevance to the cause. So sponsored run for heart disease. Not a sponsored big mac eat.

Have you noticed though around Children in Need Time / Comic Relief there is always someone just desparate to do a sponsored "sit naked in a bath of beans" (or similar)

I always think, "you've always wanted to sit naked in a bath of beans haven't you? It's a big thing for you, you've been waiting for an opportunity to do it all your life and you don't give a monkeys about the poor children, you only care about the feel of the beans against your inner thighs. You weirdo"

But maybe that's just me

YANBU. Things like sponsored swims, walks, 1k runs are pointless, and even if they raise money, I suspect the money comes from people who feel obliged to sponsor the individual, or are happy to support the charity regardless of the sponsored activity.

Things like jumping out of a plane, if paid for by the person getting the experience, rather than being paid for by the sponsors, are not so bad IMO. But then I've done that, and it did take some guts.

Climbing Kilamanjaro or simelar is taking it to the other extreme. I would sponsor someone who was paying to do it out of their own pocket, but not if they were paying for it out of the sponsorship.

I agree it should be more relevant to the intended charity, but if it can't be then the charity still deserves its fair share of sponsored support.

Yes orry, not so much relevant, but I tend to associate runs/walks etc with health charities and cake sales/jumble sales etc with children's chairities. Not sure why. But in line with the values of the charity at least.

I won't sponsor those who go abroad to have an 'experience' in the name of charity. When they sign up, they are told they have to raise a minimum amount (say, £1500) for example for an African jaunt that a colleague went on. We were told she would be 'braving' the white water rapids, and doing a 10 mile walk in the desert. The actual amount that went to the charity was about £150, so in effect everybody was clubbing together to pay for her summer holiday.

I worked in a backpackers' hostel in the Lake District till recently, and most weekends we would get people in cycling the coast to coast for charity. That, I understand - if you are not a cyclist it's quite a trek and a bit steepish in places. It is generally advisable to train, at least a bit, if you've not been on a bike for a while. benefits clear from the sheer amount of overweight lycra we saw.

What I never got were the big groups coming in, booked by a third party operator (ie who are charging the charity), who were off to "climb Scafell". Last time I checked, you didn't need ropes to get to the top of Scafell and it could be done as a Sunday afternoon stroll. And most people who come to the Lakes will be doing something of that ilk, usually involving a lot more hills and a lot less drama. I applaud the people who are moved out of their comfort zone to do it, but I do get the feeling that quite a few people are being conned along the way. And I fully agree with the OP that most of them could be doing something a bit more useful to raise money.

You are kind of being U - I`d sponser my kids to be silent for a while .
I suppose its a way for kids to get involved with fundraising, but adults doing daft stuff, is just, daft.
I agree with emmanana about sponsoring someone to go on their jollys. This does annoy me alot.
And if a pop star can climb a mountain they can damn well pick up a spade and dig a well/build a school. These expeditions cost so much money.

I won't sponsor people to do things that cost a lot to do, unless they are paying for it themselves. I did do a sponsored abseil a few years ago, purely because I fancied doing an abseil, but I paid the minimum sponsorship myself and everything I raised went to the charity. I don't think you are being unreasonable in many cases. Friends of mine went to SA and built houses in the slum to replace the cardboard shacks that were being lived in. That was worth sponsoring! I don't have a problem with sponsoring kids to do spelling tests and even short runs, but I think you have a point.

Hmm I said it was a bit of a lazy post.

All those who pointed out that you might not have a skill that relates to the charity are right of course.

I think my examples were bad. Without undermining those who do walk/run/swim for charity - of course the charity benefits and huge amounts are raised no question - I still think that tasks could have more 'value' in their own right. Perhaps not related to the cause but something with an end result (other than the cash raised).

For example, you might be raising money for Cancer Research but your 'task' could benefit an entirely different group of people in the process.

And don't even get me started on funding peoples holidays. No, I will not sponsor you to 'lie on a beach wash an elephant' in India