The dates
listed on this timeline are as accurate as the publications on Greta Christina’s
Blog Timeline.
Greta Christina
(GC) was diagnosed with endometrial cancer and subsequently informed her online
community.
GC put out a
heartfelt plea for donations.
“The bad
news again, and the part where I’m going to ask for help: This situation is
going to seriously interfere with my ability to work for a little while. I’m
going to be weak and doped up on pain meds for at least a couple of weeks after
the surgery — possibly longer — and travel will be inadvisable for six weeks after the surgery. And all
that’s assuming the best-case scenario of “no chemo or radiation”… which,
again, is the most likely scenario, but not the only one.”
“Speaking
gigs are a significant part of my income, both for the honoraria and the
book sales.”
“If I could not worry about money for
the weeks while I’m recovering, it would take a big, big load off my mind. So
I’m swallowing my pride, and am doing a fundraiser/ pledge drive.”
The [bold] statement above is in essence,
the plea to the community for cash/donations to alleviate her worries related
to financial commitments during her recovery time.
As I understand
it, this is the nature of the cause.
Greta in no
way, shape or form worded her appeal to the community for funds to be sent as
gifts for the sake of “Gifting” a sum of money. That would be outright begging
IMO, and would be viewed as such.
Greta has “donate”
and “subscribe” buttons as a permanent fixture on the side bar of her blog
page/s. This is clearly understood by the reader as a suggestion by the author
to donate or subscribe to her blog if the audience sees some value in her
writings.
You will
also notice two more buttons located on
the sidebar of each page directing the reader to make either a donation or
recurring subscription payments to” Free Thought Blogs” if they so wish.
This
particular blog has an additional two buttons embedded at the bottom of the
post, which can be generally assumed to be a utility provided by the author to
allow her readers/donators to make
donations or subscription payments in relation to her panhandling.
The donation
drive commenced October 18th 2012 9:47am.
Greta
Christina posted a new blog entry aptly titled: “Wow, wow, wow, – and thanks”
Greta
expressed her gratitude to her readership for which she described as “a
thumping success.”
She further
wrote:
“It has
exceeded all my expectations. I will be
able to comfortably cover my mortgage and other expenses for a few months,
while I recover my health and get my writing and speaking career revved up
again afterwards. No further donations or spreading of the word are necessary:
I’ve actually gotten somewhat [definition: adverb- To a moderate extent
or by a moderate amount] more than I
really need, and I’m seriously contemplating donating the overflow — probably
to the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Light
the Night Walk via the Foundation Beyond Belief, and/or to Camp Quest. (I feel okay
about asking my readers for financial help, but I feel weird taking more than I
really need.)”
This
concluded the charity drive. (Ending at approximately 2:42pm, October 19th
2012, based on the time of first comment posted thereafter)
Upon reading
this post^ I noticed some inconsistencies relating to the original request for
donations.
GC
explicitly states in her pre-donation post dated December 18th 2012,
she is in need of donations to cover expenses for the weeks whilst recovering.
At the
conclusion of the charity drive Greta states clearly that she intends to use
the donations to cover mortgage and other expenses for a few months.
This has
since been trumped with a new statement published January 6th 2013.
“I spent the overwhelming majority of
the donations from that fundraiser paying my mortgage several months in advance.”
This
statement implies the recipient has received donations which exceeded the
target. (overflow)
Greta
Christina made a call to end the fundraiser just 29 hours after its
commencement. The recipient then directs any further donations to be forwarded
directly to the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Light the Night Walk
via the Foundation Beyond Belief, or to Camp
Quest. GC however, merely contemplates, albeit seriously, donating the
overflow- “probably” to the above mentioned charity organisations.
Greta publishes a post asking her
followers to once again contribute to another cause. Skepticon, an event on the
atheist/sceptical calendar were experiencing financial difficulty due to low
funding. This conference is listed on
Greta’s calendar, as she is a nominated speaker for the event.
“I was supposed to speak at Skepticon 5. My cancer
surgery threw a monkey wrench into that plan, although we’re hoping that I’m
well enough by November 9 to get me Skyped in.”
Further:
“Now, as
many of my readers know, I recently did a fundraiser here on this blog, to help cover my expenses
while I recover from cancer surgery. As readers also may know, I stopped that fundraiser about a day after it started, even
though word about the fundraiser was still being spread and donations were
still coming in, since I’d already raised all the money I needed and then some.”
At this
point in time GC seems to be relying on the donations received (for living
expenses) but sets an example for her followers by stating “Ingrid and I just
donated $100.00 to keep Skepticon going. Please chip in
what you can. Thanks.”
This may
simply be Greta’s preferred choice of charities for at least part of her
overflow contribution. There is yet to be any publication by GC, or the
interwebz, or any single charity organization expressing thanks for receipt for
any other (overflow) donations.
Greta has
now returned to work in some capacity and creates a blog
“It’s a Friday evening, and there’s a
party Ingrid and I said we’d go to. It’s a Friday evening, which all too often
means Ingrid and I are exhausted by our work weeks.”
This
statement suggests Greta has resumed work duties.
Further:
“I’m at a conference. Or rather, I’m
in a hotel room at some un-fucking-godly hour in the morning, getting ready for
a conference. I am not by any stretch of the imagination a morning person, and
I am fighting the urge to say “Fuck it,” to return to the big comfy hotel bed
and sleep for six more hours, to stay in the big bed all day watching TV and
masturbating and ordering room service. But I remember, vaguely and distantly
through my groggy haze, that I actually do like this work, that I am wildly
fortunate to be able to do this work, that once I’m at the conference I will
want to be there doing this work. Also,
I remember that the conference organizers are paying me to be there, and if I
don’t show up they’ll want their money back.”
It’s now
just under two months after surgery and GC is attending a conference and
participating in paid speaking engagements.
Greta often blogs about current fashion, and
in her latest installment was discussing dressy, comfortable shoes. Several
references were made to a pair of upmarket shoes designed and manufactured by
John Fluevog.
It seems
that Greta’s blog has now been edited and the cost and purchase of these shoes
at $200+ is now edited out of the blog post.
A portion of
the online community expressed outrage over the purchase of said shoes,
claiming the panhandle recipient is spending charitable donations earmarked for
essential living expenses on luxuries.
This
behaviour initiated discourse on the blogosphere from both sides of the camp.
Those in support of Greta, and those with opposing views.
The three
main topics of discussion are as follows:
- 1. Is the purchase of upmarket shoes a necessity or a frivolous luxury afforded by donations pledged?
- 2. Did the panhandling recipient take advantage of the overflow of charitable donations and prepay months of living expenses, as opposed to weeks, as was stated in the first post?
- 3. Has the recipient followed the direction she gave her readers and pledged her overflow of funds to a worthwhile charity organization?
There seems
to be some discussion on the blogosphere defending Greta’s receipt of some
monies as “gifts”.
GC attempts
to defend her use of funds by changing her mission statement to this:
“I spent the overwhelming majority of
the donations from that fundraiser paying my mortgage several months in advance”
“several” definition [adjective- more than a few, an indefinite small number]
“few” definition [adjective- not many but more
than one. Two or more]
Realising the true
definition of Greta’s post-donation statement it can be assumed the donations GC
received, adequately covered the costing for living expenses and mortgage
payments, not only for a number of weeks as first published in her campaign,
but now carries her expenses for several months.
Greta’s
followers made several claims of explicitly stating that their donation is/was
intended as a gift, therefore can be spent on items other than those expressed
in the charity drive. This conversation did not start until her panhandling
exercise concluded, and only by a handful of commenters on her blog.
Over 170
commenters responded to Greta’s plea and expressed their support, both
emotional and monetary. I was unable to
find a single entry in the comment section specifically stating the pledged
contribution can be used for something other than what was described as “living
expenses”.
Greta’s
followers challenged the idea of unethical use of the proceeds and made several
claims, whilst pointing to comments (post charity drive) approving of her use
of the funds by any means she sees fit, which includes luxuries.
Several
supportive commenters who did NOT contribute to the fundraising expressly
advised Greta to either “spend on whatever she likes”, or “Keep the overflow
for herself”.
- · 9 commenters approving the “keep the overflow cash” idea, by self admission, did not donate.
- · 11 commenters approving the “keep the overflow cash” idea, made no admissions to donating.
- · 4 commenters approving the “keep the overflow cash” idea, actually made a contribution, although, one contributor, by admission, only donated pennies.
Finally, if Greta was serious
about ceasing the influx of “Donations”, she’d remove the “Donate” and “Subscription”
buttons located beneath her heart felt plea.
At the time of writing this article,
no such attempts were made to cease receiving “ it would take a big, big load off my
mind” donations.
It’s been
stated several times throughout this article that the fundraising target has
been reached and no further assistance is needed. The donation drive has
ceased. An overwhelming amount of money raised. An overflow of donations may or
may not be pledged to a worthy charity organization, based on an ambiguous
statement made by GC.
Pushing the
goal posts.
Appeal to
pity.
Luxury
items.
Dishonest
defense by commenters.
Nil pledge
of the overflow.
Double
income.
Challenged ethics.
NO THANK
YOU.
Tweet
