This is where I am and I also feel what @[email protected] has commented with below.

I am a person who can, at times, donate to people in need. But, at a point when it became overwhelming, I had to block the comm (and feel like shit for doing so) and prioritize in-person, local donations over the mutual aid comm. Here is my reasoning for what it is worth:

-The frustration of seeing people shouting over people who clearly need the financial assistance more. This is not to say people cannot ask for help without being in extreme danger, in fact, I don’t want to imply that at all. The people “shouting” began to prey upon empathetic posters with guilt-trip, ALL CAPS, calls to action based on dubious urgency. They would aim to eclipse other members who contribute more to the site, who are less sensationalist, and I’d argue more at-risk. Can I prove any of this? Nah, of course not. But, any decent comrade shouldn’t be trying to drown out his other comrades in need and they assuredly shouldn’t resort to emotional manipulation to do so. We’re all socialists liberals here, we’re empathetic to a fault. There is no need to emotionally manipulate in order to be heard. Just tell us what you need and be respectful to your fellow comrades with your posting-etiquette. For this reason, I am in favor of limiting the intervals that members can ask for donations with new posts/threads. Bumping or whatever can occur within a mega thread or something. Updates on the situation should occur from the poster in the thread that already exists, otherwise. Spamming the comm with bump threads is just spam that, as others have stated, leads to an emotional-manipulation arms race that ultimately causes high-empathy, generous comrades to get overwhelmed and block the comm. It is my belief that a socialist legitimately in need would not resort to these tactics to begin with and so I am highly skeptical that the posts I’m referring to aren’t just some fascist ass-clown abusing goodwill as a hobby and directly harming legitimate comrades in the process.

-The frustration of not being able to reliably, anonymously donate to the people I want to help. Many times when I attempted to help, the medium with which assistance was requested either failed to process because the institution itself thought I was being scammed and blocked in a paternalistic manner from the recipient or I became sketched out by the platform I was being asked to use. I don’t intend to dox myself when I want to help people and I don’t want to have comrades in need feel unheard because they are using platforms that don’t allow for international/anonymous donations. For this reason I am in favor of a mod-sanctioned and organized method to reliably donate to the people in need of assistance.

-The frustration of seeing the communities limited resources be essentially on retainer for just a few charismatic members. Asking for an indefinite subsidy can only serve to limit available resources for comrades experiencing unexpected emergencies. I realize that this line of thought may lead to dubious, theatrical “emergencies” becoming widespread in an effort to “compete” for the communities resources; this is why there needs to be moderation that curtails such emotional manipulations. For this reason I am in favor of anyone seeking indefinite subsidy to be required to set up a patreon or GoFundMe for some basic transparency to protect other comrades in need. In this golden-age of scamming - I really fail to see why using a payment platform is undesirable for both people in need of help and those seeking to help. The concept of “anonymous charity on the internet” is painful naivety.