Comments On: Re: Human Spam by Dominic Holden http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2008/11/24/re_human_spam Comments On: Re: Human Spam by Dominic Holden en-us Copyright 2009 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0800 Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:45:00 -0800 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by workethic]]> Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:39:05 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]>
Oh, speak for yourself. I belong to the Council for Secular Humanism. Not quite a church (eupraxophy, anyone?), but that's who I funnel my tithing through.
Posted by emma's bee]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:18:53 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]>
If you have questions about their finances, ask them. Any canvasser worth their salt will be able to show you a breakdown of where their revenue goes. Ask for their business license if you're feeling especially Dan-Savage-level paranoid. But they have a right to do their job. It's a very effective way of locating new members for many nonprofits.

Also - most nonprofits I know will mark in their records if you don't want your name sold or rented.
Posted by Sky Bluesky]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:52:16 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by Bellevue Ave]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:31:48 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by J.R. Labrador]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:28:42 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Dan won't talk... did Marlee Ginter issue an apology? If so, why won't Dan run it? If not, why did he change his posts? If KOMO didn't issue an apology or retraction, and Dan changed his posts and dropped the issue, then it seems that his whole rant was pointless. What gives?
Posted by talk talk]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:36:17 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> renew their memberships directly to the organization.
Posted by Dominic Holden]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:01:44 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by Amnt]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:55:44 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]>
Giving money directly to a nonprofit does not mean all of the money goes to the organization's work, exactly. All organizations have a large staff [contracted or formally part of the organization] dedicated to fundraising--usually one of the largest in any successful nonprofit--called development. So whether you give online, in the mail, by phone, or to a canvasser on the street, some of your money is going to the staff that raises and administers the money. ... Without raising money on the streets, these organizations would raise less of it. You can't expect an organization to sit back idly and wait for people to send them cash. Those organizations die.
Posted by Dominic Holden]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:42:47 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by Simone]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:35:57 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]>
Most of what I read was from the 04/06 elections, but it sounds like they put their workers through hell and it is basically a progressive cause pyramid scheme. Reportedly the average canvasser lasts two weeks, which is why you constantly see the signs and craigslist ads.

I almost signed up because of the "help the ACLU!" thing. If you really want to help the ACLU (I'm a member and have done volunteer work for them) join and give directly.
Posted by Amnt]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:35:09 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by mike]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:53:05 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by c'mon and post it]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:48:01 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]>
This is an aquisition strategy, one that looses money on new members' initial membership investments. Panning for members is extremely expensive, as the payoff only comes when members renew or make additional investments in addition to their membership dues.

The reason WashPIRG, ACLU, Greenpeace, etc... use these expensive aquisition strategies is not, as Dan Savage concludes, that "enough browbeaten, guilt-tripped passersby must respond to human spam to make it worth the time and effort for human spammers."

No, it's that enough of you all-talk, no-walk, so-called progressive jackasses never go beyond slapping on a half-witted bumper sticker or anonymously attacking Religious zealots online in your quest for change that these groups have to resort to guilt to get you to invest.

Real change takes MONEY because it takes TIME and EFFORT and political SKILL, which requires people to be PAID. Until enough of you well-meaning but functionally useless progressives start investing generously and on your own impulse, "human spam" will remain one of the only effective ways of aquiring you as real participants in our progressive movement.
Posted by erostratus]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:42:57 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by SeattleBrad]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:38:14 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]>
In the FREE America which we all should cherish, folks are FREE to earn a living by many means, and selling is certainly one of them.

In fact, Dan sell his shit too. Just not on the sidewalk.

I have never had a problem with a friendly - "not at all interested, thanks" - seems to work fine.

What is the rub? I am sure street prospecting is outlawed in most communist countries and in many Asia mind control - all control regimes. Not in a FREE country.

Want that? I don't.

You fear them, stay home in the bubble.

Remember, a little attitude and a firm no thanks works.
Posted by Bob]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:25:02 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by Dominic Holden]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:16:01 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]>
Look, I'm a member of some of the groups, but it really gets annoying being asked to help even more.

And where did you find hot dogs? Are they bratwursts, N?
Posted by Will in Seattle]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:14:48 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> If we don't like them, we should go away—just walk right past them.

Did you even read Dan's post? You completely missed what he was saying..

And then... the human spam started approaching people who couldn't walk on by, people who couldn't brush past 'em. You know, there really ought to be a law against human spam approaching actual humans standing in a line to buy hot dogs from a cart.

Posted by N]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:07:10 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Re: Human Spam]]> Posted by bbbbring]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:05:24 -0800 The Stranger