Mutual_Aid discussion post

I think any changes at this point will ultimately reduce the amount that mutual aid users receive so I am against them.
The recipients need to be prioritized over everything else. Onlookers/bystanders don't belong in this discussion at all. The goal should be to maximize aid, not make it easier to ignore cries for help.
- so we should continue to allow meta-posts?

I've done some self crit and no longer think meta posting should be allowed
I think the path forward dealing with potential scams should be the user who thinks someone is scamming should message the mods/admins, they can determine if the accused user should be banned, and then they make a mod post if they choose to ban them

A lot of scratched liberals in this thread. Some of you really couldn't help yourselves, could you?
A user spent the money on drugs!
Who gives a shit? Would it matter if some of the Palestinians in Mutual Aid wanted to get high after seeing their families murdered? No, it wouldn't. You're just means testing based on location and circumstance. If anything, I appreciate the honesty and transparency. But rather than trying to help people deal with addiction, some of you saltine-looking motherfuckers would rather wag your finger at vulnerable people as you pearl clutch over """"crime"""" the way your fellow liberals think drug addiction deserves jail time.
A user got too much money!
Again, who gives a shit? If you think someone got too much money, then don't donate to them. It's as simple as that. Nobody is making you give money to anonymous strangers.
Someone is scamming!
Yeah, no shit? You're sending money into the void. It's anonymous. Nothing you see on the internet is real, even when people have their real names and photos attached to a profile. That's the risk you take when you contribute to Mutal Aid. Donating to someone, then finding out it was a "scam" is on you. Do you go around telling people your social security number? How about your debit card PIN? Because I do. I tell medical professionals and social services my SSN when I think I can trust them to use that information appropriately. If I get a scam call, I don't tell them shit. I hang up. Mutal Aid is similar: either you trust the person on the other end to use their discretion or you don't. If you don't trust them, then why are you giving them money? If you do trust them, then why are you getting up in their shit over how it's being used? You're not donating to improve the material conditions someone lives in. You're donating to have power over them. Fuck you.
They didn't spend the money on what they said they would!
You sound like the reactionaries who piss and shit all over themselves because poor people have smartphones and refrigerators. That's you, except you're saying it to people treating themselves to a nicer meal or having a Netflix subscription they can watch while they live outside in a fucking tent while it rains. If you want to have it be for a specific thing, then be upfront about your means testing. You can DM the user about getting them a gift card for a specific thing or call the place the person is going to be buying their $200,174,192 doodad and pay for it electronically. But don't do this shit where you give them money with no strings attached, then try to attach strings after it's been handed over.
Seriously a bunch of you cracker liberals are just mad the filthy poors don't kiss your feet and wipe your ass. The fuck are you even here for? LARPing-ass poser leftist dipshits who want to maintain unjust hierarchies that benefit them.
- People who are posting stupid shit in this thread deserve this level of abrasiveness and calling out. I had to disengage last night because there's an entire 10 replies deep thread complaining about the fact that the online message board gossip they just heard about hasn't resulted in a homeless person getting banned from one of the only places allowing them to access survival funds. That level of hate is vile. Frankly this site would never allow that kind of dog whistle and concern troll style posting against our GSM and POC comrades and we shouldn't tolerate it against homeless ones.
  Pretending that some kind of rules lawyering and virtue signaling on an online anonymous message board is going to "more efficiently" solve mutual aid problems is equally as stupid as thinking that we're going to start the next communist revolution or "get Bernie elected". Grow the fuck up.
  We're ships passing in the night. Some of those ships need money. Other ships want to help. Leave it alone. It's not the community's business to get into this drama. It's the business of the users involved and the mods/admins on how they want to run mutual aid. Making this the communities business is going to be a good way to fuck up a unique and unabashedly good part of the fediverse permanently over some petty Hasan vs Ethan style bullshit. These aren't podcasters mining drama for clicks, they're real people.
  
  10 replies deep thread complaining about the fact that the online message board gossip they just heard about hasn't resulted in a homeless person getting banned
  Exactly. They're being classist scumbags and if anyone should get banned, it's them for being reactionaries. We all know the War on Drugs is a sham, yet here these fucks are wanting to wage it against other users over some bullshit.

This community's existence is literally the very reason why I've been able to keep being alive. At times, I've been able to receive assistance from less anonymous sources, but Hexbear is the place that truly kept me going considering the amount of support I've gotten here.
This isn't an exaggeration—if I look back on my life for as long as I've been in these shitty circumstances and reimagine me navigating them without c/mutual_aid, it's a very nerve-wracking hypothetical to ponder. I most likely would've been dead soon enough.
Skepticism is certainly expected, but I feel like the desire to weed out scammers or disingenuous people is seeming so strong through this struggle that people are myopically forgetting to consider what some hard restrictions on this community would actually entail for the state of some of our lives.
I hate that I have to rely on c/mutual_aid to literally survive; that brief period where I actually had a job and didn't have to use this community as a recipient (and could even use it as a donor) was the happiest time period I can recall while being through this whole mess. And then, without an iota of transparency, that job chops me, but after trying to find work since then, even at the least demanding (in terms of requirements) workplaces, I realized the ride will continue to be a long, bumpy one. I hate working with animal products, but I went as far to apply to places like McDonald's and KFC, and I still couldn't get hired.
Being Black and transfem led me to this hell, but something I've always picked up on from people is that they might do something like put #blacktranslivesmatter in their bio but not actually understand just how harsh it can be to live this way, especially if you are in a reactionary region, as I do. And, as I can see, I'm not the only person who is saying these sort of things.
I don't know what else to say other than I hope we come to a reasonable solution here. This anxiety is far from what I need right now, so I'm going to try not to read these comments too much.

Honestly looking back over this thread makes me afraid to even ask for aid anymore. I had no idea it was this much of an issue simmering under the surface and that worries the fuck out of me because I rely on this place to keep myself fed. It honestly feels like fixing something that wasn't broken.
- the community has ebbed and flowed with the amount of use and understandably so it is being used more than in the past. the intent of the changes is to try and reduce barriers to those posting in the community and make it more fair for all posters. this is a follow up to the change we made no longer site pinning individual mutual aid posts and dealing with the increasing amount of meta-posting regarding the community and those that use it.

If people think something is a scam they can take it up with the mods. No need to make meta posts. We're not going to shame the needy anymore than society already does. I don't want mutual_aid turn into some liberal means tested "hmmmm but are you really poor?" BS. Nope. On the other hand I think we are too small to be a reliable source of aid for people. I don't know what the solution is, but whatever is decided I hope we don't turn to the dehumanising judgement practices that cause this kind of desperation in the first place.
- none of the changes would be with the intent of placing means testing on users posting there, more so trying to standardize it so that everyone can get a fair chance of being seen there while trying to make space for non-monetary resources to be shared.
  
  That's good. Thank you for trying to make it more fair.

Wanted to update what the considered changes to the community are in summary:
users can post 3 times a week, asks no more than 100$ each post
display name is changed to "emergency aid"
users communicate if they are open to non monetary resources (local aid groups, etc.)
user requests aid, amount requested in title using [$0/$x] format
users donate and report the post with the amount donated, mods note it or report it with a message indicating they donated so a mod can comment
user updates title with amount received and the thread is locked when the goal is met
meta posts are no longer permitted
We will do a follow up post where voting on keeping the community as is or changing it will occur.
If you want to propose changes to this summary please answer in a comment below this one.
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
do you think we should allow meta posts?
- tldr: NO
  Im still failing to see a problem with how things are currently run. can i get more info without calling anyone out? i read thru these replies and im pretty confused about this and why things even need to change.
  do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
  how tf are we equipped to know what constitutes a proper limit?
  do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
  how would this even help? what problem is this addressing? are people upset about scrolling by requests? those people need to just block the comm.
  If we're bound and determined to "fix" the issue for comrades who just can't stand to see people asking for money, maybe a major format change could be something like a featured megathread instead? i don't even like that idea at all, I'm sure that idea has a major downsides but i still think it's better than trying to limit posts.
  do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
  that seems like an awful lot of work for the mods. i don't want my donations tracked either.
  Furthermore, what is the endpoint of this accounting, besides eventually questioning aid receivers on the "proper use" of funds received?
  do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
  
  i hate semantics, hate hate hate hate hate them.
  do you think we should allow meta posts?
  "meta" as in users attacking or questioning aid receivers, like hella super
  
  "meta" posts as in like...directing donators and requesters to aid programs, yes!
  Sticky, sidebar something that might help people get aid they didn't know was available, or help donators wantin to direct their funds to more accountable, established aid programs might be nice.
  gotta be
  alla these ideas just seem like means testing with different coats of paint.
  Are people donating really upset about their donations not "doing what they should"? I... really think those folks need to take a deep breath and reevaluate what it means to give.
  What funds spared will not prevent people needing money again; no matter how we wish it were different. No matter how "well" the receiver spends it. Offering a donation —no matter how high— is never enough payment towards the right to judge how well it is spent.
  Those who want to arbitrate "proper" use of donated money should either donate to an org, or put their money where their mouth is, and post their budgets!
  Then they should sit on their hands and listen, contrite, as their comrades explain sanctimoniously how their spending could be better directed towards more mutual_aid.
  
  some users of the community feel that they have to make multiple posts to even be seen which makes other posts harder unless they also make multiple posts.
  the point of accounting is to help posters to update their post with amount received and lock it when the need has been met so other posts can receive the aid
  meta as in posts related to anything outside of posting asking for aid, comments bumping it or comments replying that they've send the aid which would include both posts detailing suspected scams as well as lists of non monetary aid
- input for all of these changes should prioritize c/mutual_aid users thoughts first and foremost. from what i've gathered reading this thread, most of these proposed changes are from users who don't interact with c/mutual_aid or are themselves donors. this is not prioritizing the community members most impacted by these changes and instead they're being ignored, combatted, or scared shitless by these potential changes. these changes have very real and potentially dire consequences for these users. all this doesn't feel right at all.
  
  some of the suggestions were from private messages from people receiving donations feeling that the current state of the community is not healthy. you are correct about the changes if any should priotritize the community members that would be most impacted. I will reach out privately to those people to see what they think should happen. Do you think that we should keep meta-posts?
- I agree with everything except limiting the amount requested. That seems arbitrary and would make the comm useless to people who need more than $100 (or whatever limit we would set), as emergencies often are more costly than that especially in the current economy. Imo the other requested changes would greatly improve the experience for both requestors and donators without setting a hard cap on how much someone can ask for.
- A posting limit might be okay but I don’t think we should limit amount asked.
  Tracking would be nice
  No need to change the name, it’s just semantics at that point.
  No meta posts, if users have actual proof of scamming, they should submit it to the mods and admins.
- do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount requested?
  I don't think this is very helpful, different people will have different financial situations, and if we are trying to focus more on emergency aid, some emergencies are much more costly than others. I think this will actively encourage "spamming" at the start of a week and the comm will get flooded with requests all at once, making it much easier for some to slip through the cracks.
  do you think there should be a weekly limit on amount of posts?
  This one I agree with, especially with a focus on emergency aid, though I think the mods may have to make exceptions in very specific circumstances, someone having two massive disasters in one week is rare, but not unheard of. I doubt it will ever actually come up though.
  do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
  I like this idea a lot. I would rather donations not be loud public displays, I don't feel comfortable donating in such a way, but just a simple tracking system will go a long way, while not actively spotlighting anyone, plus I think seeing locked posts that have had their goals met will be good for morale.
  do you think we change the name from mutual_aid to emergency aid?
  I think since mutual aid is probably a bit too difficult to do over an online anonymous system like this, it is probably better phrased that way.
  do you think we should allow meta posts?
  I think a monthly meta thread could be good, one that enables people to ask for aid that isn't necessarily financial, more things like advice and support. It could also be a good way to "allow" meta discussion without it taking over the comm.
  
  I think a monthly meta thread could be good, one that enables people to ask for aid that isn't necessarily financial, more things like advice and support. It could also be a good way to "allow" meta discussion without it taking over the comm.
  I like this idea. A regular megathread of advice and resources would actually feel more like mutual aid than just charity.
- users donate and report the post with the amount donated, mods note it or report it with a message indicating they donated so a mod can comment
  i think this could be used for potential harm to user's aid posts. i remember c/mutual_aid users mentioning an issue of people not following through with aid after messaging for their details. what would happen if someone reports that they sent funds to a user when they actually didn't? would confirmation default to the person receiving aid?
  do you think mods should keep track of amounts received via user reports after donating?
  i don't think mods should but i don't have an alternative that i can think of right now to fully answer this question.
  
  With this proposed system people who say they sent funds and don't will first be warned and then sitebanned.
- Hey I'm glad to see this situation getting attention but starting out the discussion post with
  This post is to discuss the mutual aid community's rule of allowing meta posts: mutual aid as a community, those making posts in it and those commenting on posts.
  We are considering removing the exception allowing meta posts but wanted to involve the userbase before committing to a change.>
  Please comment with any thoughts, feelings, or suggestions regarding this change.
  and then turning around and saying "okay here's a list of sweeping changes based on feedback" feels like a major shift. I didn't post any generic suggestions about what to do with the comm because I thought the post was intended to be specifically about one rule changing
  anyhow, of that list:
  No (a higher limit maybe, but it seems hard to draw a line here)
  Yes.
  Lean no. Depends on how its implemented.
  Don't care
  Yes
  
  This includes various suggestions made by users and mods both on this post, others and the mod chat
- No.
  Maybe?
  Yes.
  No.
  No.

I think things should stay the way they are. Maybe there should just be a limit on how often someone can post. It’s a bit unsettling to see some people asking for help week after week, it starts to feel like the help is already factored into their budget and not like an emergency fund.
I don’t say this from a place of ignorance. I grew up in deep poverty myself, and I genuinely wish for all people to be lifted out of poverty and to have all their needs met. Otherwise, I wouldn’t call myself a communist.

It's always the nature of giving money that the funds could be misused, especially when anonymous. I can't think of way to improve that risk without putting in some sort of hoops to jump through or a verification process, but that is burdonesome for people that need help and people don't want to risk doxxing. The verification that money was given and received through reports sounds like an improvement possibly. It would be good if it could be more for proper mutual aid, like sharing goods directly or organizing food give-outs but people would have to trust each other more or risk doxxing again. A name change could be suitable.
If someone has verifiable information that a poster is scamming or whatever, they can take that to the mods directly, but I agree with the idea that meta posts cause more drama. As well the maximum request amount seems like a hinderance as some emergencies can be quite expensive, and it's not like a high request forces people to give more, people with the means can donate what they decide.

No perfect solutions here.
Meta stuff should be kept to a minimum. If somebody thinks/knows a post on the comm is dodgy, they probably should DM the mods of the com with their 'recipts'... but... we're all mostly strangers to each other here so I'd be incredibly surprised if more than a tiny fraction of these "snitch" DM's would have iron clad claims. But if the mods decide there's enough there to act on, it should be a mod who drops a post about why a specific user or post has been locked/deleted/banned with comments from the other mods on the post letting the rest of the hexbear user base know that more mods were okay with the action than not and the conversation stops there.
Nobody here should be gatekeeping what "mutual aid" means. This is an online forum, of anonymous users, where practically no Hexbears are ever physically around another Hexbear user. What "mutual aid" means in this context is pretty much, drop a few bucks in a Venmo or post emojis of sympathy. If you want to drop some change in somebody's digital tin cup, awesome. If you're worried about "being ripped off" you might want to rethink what you're doing looking at the mutual aid com.
- If you're worried about "being ripped off" you might want to rethink what you're doing looking at the mutual aid com.
  I think this holds up when its people asking for $20 here and there. Anyone e-panhandling for $20 clearly needs the money far more than I do, same as people on the street. But when its hundreds or thousands for specific needs, I think it does matter that those needs are genuine because that amount of money could have fed dozens of others rather than potentially going to someone who isn't being truthful. I don't think that's generally the case, I think the vast majority of our posters have been genuine, but to say nobody should care at all if they're being lied to is hard for me to stomach

What benefit is there to allowing meta posts? The description of mutual aid should be changed to reflect that it is mainly used for fundraising, but if you don't or can't contribute, just unsubscribe or block the comm.

I think it's in a bad state and recently blocked it. A space where community members can help each other out in crisis is great, and while it sometimes functions like that, it's used as an uregulated fundraising charity just as often.
When we see people asking for hundreds of dollars in donations every month, we need to ask if that's actually within the scope of this site to handle in a safe manner. As it stands, I don't think it is. 100 % of the risks is put on the person donating, as that's the only way we can do it with the resources available, but that's an awful way to do charity.
At the very least, I think the current warning in the comm about posts not being vetted is not clear enough and should explicitly warn users that they might be getting scammed.
- Other than the sidebar and a community featured post we don't have much options for increasing awareness but I'll loom into solutions for this. Thank you

- self crit on why you believe yourself an arbiter of what poor people are deserving of.
- come on this sucks. who cares if they get takeout or things you specifically don't deem necessary. this is a paternalistic mindset which i feel like comes out when people donate and still view their donation as their money rather than the recipients money at that point. when it's in their account it's theirs to use as they please and they shouldn't have to feel sorry for not spending it as you would've.
  also if i was surviving day to day i think it would be extremely fair for me to want to spend some money to just enjoy things, just as i think it would be fair for you to do the same.
- There’s nothing wrong with buying Taco Bell and “random bullshit.” I don’t think this attitude, expressed many times over in this thread, that homeless people have to live the most spartan existence in order to deserve help has any place here.
  
  People here don't hold homeless users in contempt. They are limited in what they can provide. Yes, homeless people should not have to live the most spartan existence, but if the limited funds available to us on hexbear can either provide for two people sparsely, or leave one to starve while the other feasts, I think I know what we'd pick.
  You made people feel helpless, and they disengaged from donations.
  Trying to explain yourself over and over again isn't helping anything -- and I really really don't mean that in a cruel way.

- This is the reality.
  We're a small community. Funds are limited. Trust is everything.

I don't see how it's possible to run a mutual aid comm with anonymous people scattered all over the world. Mutual aid really requires a much closer knit network of people working together in tangible non-monetary ways. I've done a little mutual aid offline, and mostly it's the combination of a plan and people giving the right aid and advice to advance that plan that really changes people's situation.
What we have is a charity comm. If we're going to run a charity comm some regulation would help.
Limiting posts to one per week, or month, per account to stop the competition for visibility and subsequent blocking of the comm by people overwhelmed by the number of similar or repeated posts. Hexbear is not a large community, and many people are now blocking the comm because it makes them feel uneasy.
Enforcing the use of an external tracking tool like GoFundMe so people can be confident when targets are or aren't met for a given post. It also provides a little bit of legitimacy and makes donations easier for many people who would be considering it.
Allowing people to provide suggestions for local support such as specific food banks or shelters: things that may reduce weekly repeats on the charity comm. Allowing people to suggest alternative purchases or actions, such as a more cost efficient alternative could be useful.
Regardless of moral judgements, donators need confidence in the system for the comm to function. Otherwise it's just a drama generator that fosters contempt and mistrust while also leaving people feeling abandoned. A couple of incidents have really blown peoples trust, and left them fatigued. The situation is not going to change unless adjustments are made. As for discussions about the validity of a users cause - evidently, even when discussion of causes is forbidden, people still seethe and it still seeps into and erupts throughout the whole instance. The amount of recurring drama from one incident alone that is taboo to talk about is enough indication that simply banning discussions isn't actually helping much, if at all.
- I'm OOL, what happened? Am I even allowed to ask? lol
  Edit: nevermind I think I pieced it together
  
  the inciting incident for this post was a meta-post recently but the history goes back years. its messy.

I think the non-monetary aspect of "mutual aid" could be focused on better in this community, instead of "aid" just being solely monetary donations, we could organise groups and discussions devoted to keeping each other honest with finances, and helping each other budget, find potential sources of income, things like that. Have it work like an actual mutual aid org instead of just a donation bucket. Maybe have a monthly/weekly discussion topic about financial issues and ways to deal with them, or more emphasis on mentorships and accountability, if people have trouble organising their finances and would like someone to help keep them on track for their longer term goals.
This isn't unique to this mutual aid comm, I've seen way too many people spiral despite getting financial aid, because they don't have the emotional support network they actually need to push past their current issues. I don't think we can do things on the same level as an IRL organisation, but a little bit of help beyond just financial aid, might end up going a long way, both for the health of the comm and the people in it.
At the same time, I do recognise that being too open about locations and events is bad opsec, and I'm honestly not really sure how to square that circle.
- I feel caught in this tension of paternalism vs being solution oriented, you know? I don't want to be lecturing on what a person needs to do or feel the money has strings... but also if a person is requesting the amount they are as frequently as they are - they are in a real crisis, crisis even a sudden infusion of quite substantial semi-anonymous cash (as much as hexbear could donate) won't fix because some of what's keeping them down is systemic society level issues and maybe more intractable personal health issues like mental health or chronic medical health. I could care less if they wanna service an addiction or buy ubereats (I waste plenty of money on both), that's their perogative - but I do hope there's some forward momentum and, really, a spot of cash here or there is probably not gonna be that. What I would hope for is they stabilize out of a crisis and hook into their local scene not just for aid coming to them but ways they can assist others as well but I feel so trapped by a sense that this is a paternalistic or whatever attitude!! Ugh

Mutual_aid being used for scamming is inevitable I think, it is sad but idk, it is what it is. If I help 4 people, and one of them was lying and scamming, I still helped 3 people.

- That’s pretty fucking mean, and wrong.

when i was in dire straits and in danger of losing my lease one of my requests was killed in the cradle because the first comment said i was a faker. remove that shit

To be clear, I never intended to scam anyone or anything like that. When I asked for money for a new battery for my car, or whatever, I wasn’t lying. I never intentionally misrepresented my needs. I’m just fucking stupid. I would ask for money for some particular thing, and then instead of holding onto it and being responsible, oops!, I’d go buy something stupid, and no, I don’t mean drugs (I need to clarify something about this, down-comment 👇).
I did not spend all or even most of that $4,000 on drugs.
I am a drug addict. So I do sometimes spend some of the money I’m sent on drugs. Some, but never all. I am not the stereotype you probably have in your head: drugs are not the most important thing to me. When I asked for money for a particular thing, that particular thing is what comes first. When I ask for money for gas for my car I NEED GAS FOR MY CAR.
If you don’t believe me, whatever. You believe what you want to believe.
- I think I’m probably just going to burn this account since I don’t like how this keeps persisting, and I feel like I do owe it to you to not be silent. Since it feels like I caused this mess. I'm sorry for not saying anything earlier.
  For anyone else I was the one who gave her the 4,000$. It was from what wasn’t taken by the hospital when my mom died and things were sold off. I don’t have any of what I got from my mom anymore since I gave to others here and elsewhere, but I just wanted to say. It really distasteful and also how to word this. Some of you are doing more than just attacking her and still bringing this up, but also I think genuinely harming things as a whole.
  I believe her and trust her that she didn’t spend it all on drugs, and besides that she did use it on her needs and to help herself. and I remember she also used it to help others to in her community, which is really amazing considering her situation to sacrifice like that as well. I also gave her that money all upfront since I didn't want to make her jump through hoops or like make her go through others when she legit needed it more than I did and I still stand by that. And I don’t regret giving it to her.
  But it is pretty reactionary and fucked up how a good amount of you immediately go to just blaming her just because of addiction. And it interesting a lot of you are getting mad at her, like I could get mad as that was my 4,000$ but I didn’t. If I’m not mad at her for that, none of you should be either no? Like just let it go, besides it was between me and her, not the rest of you. Like some of you can fuck off for giving indignation. I also gave that much because legit like how is someone suppose to get out of being a situation like she in, if all people do is constantly just give band aids to a bleeding wound?
  I dunno, honestly seeing of this stuff just depressing and disappointing. I feel like I just made things worse to be honest.

We're already probably the lightest touch active mutual aid community on the internet. It's cool and I like it, but I suspect banning any meta discussion is only going to make donating (already a huge leap of faith sometimes) even less of a trustworthy shot.
I 100% love and appreciate the desire of this site and my comrades to make a judgment free mutual aid zone, people out there are very genuinely in need and shouldn't have to sing, dance and bare themselves to get some help. However, I do think we have to recognise some basic level of practical limits of our opsec requirements and our shitty society. Banning all meta discussion, the tiniest caveat we have to establish some very basic trust, will not help people actually feel able to provide aid to people who need it.
All being said, I think there's a fine line between metaposting and dramaposting. I see no reason the latter should be allowed. Also some relevant world-famous poetry I'm reminded of:
You often say, “I would give, but only to the deserving.”
The trees in your orchard say not so, nor the flocks in your pasture.
They give that they may live, for to withhold is to perish.
..
And what desert greater shall there be, than that which lies in the courage and the confidence, nay the charity, of receiving?
And who are you that men should rend their bosom and unveil their pride, that you may see their worth naked and their pride unabashed?

I like how, no matter how many times I say that I didn’t blow all that money on drugs, that I don’t spend all the money I receive on drugs, this shit just persists and persists.
Nobody was honest with me when I posted threads asking if everything was alright, because it seemed like something was up.

I used to give pretty regularly but ended up blocking the comm once folks started doing rolling fundraisers for multiple hundreds per month. Just rubbed me the wrong way. There's not a soul on this site who couldn't use an extra few hundred for bills per month. I was more interested in helping folks out who were experiencing acute emergencies.

As a trans refugee living in a camp, I rely on communities like this to survive emotionally and materially. When I post for help, I’m not just fighting poverty, I’m fighting invisibility.
Removing meta posts that question or critique mutual aid requests is vital. Every time someone casts doubt or makes "meta" judgments, it makes people like me feel small, like we have to prove our pain or our worth.
This space should be about solidarity, not suspicion. Please protect it, so people like me can ask for help with dignity without shame or fear.

I think the meta posts should be removed. I've only seen people be harassing doing it and the people that need help in m_a (as I am and have been) don't appreciate being talked down to or given unsolicited advice during a bad period of their lives.

It doesn't really feel like the mutual aid is very mutual. And alot of the people posting consistently on mutual aid don't really seem to post or interact outside of the comm. I don't really know too much about the situation but that's just my two cents. Not sure if the comm is accomplishing what it set out to do.
- Donations are anonymous, so you don't know who is giving aid. I have helped people who have helped me before and vice versa, can't really say who without making that help non-anonymous but we definitely help each other on that comm. Not everybody uses the comm right, but many of us give when we can and ask when we need.
  Edit: I'll add there's a chance I lose my insurance this year because of a specific mutual aid action I took last year. There's someone on here that's donated a substantial amount to me over the years and we play video games and chat for hours sometimes (if they're reading this, want you to know I just don't have access to my Matrix right now, not ignoring you, I really miss our chats). I've made some really good relationships with people over that comm.

I think it's fine as-is.
The WWW is plenty big. There's risks in everything. My risks when donating make paypal a nonstarter, worst case for me is probably someone unfortunately winding up in a situation that makes the cops look at me. I don't want that. Monero and a venmo account I've acquired which can be funded anonymously.

You know what sucks is that for people complaining about scams or people soliciting for donations for food and then using it for drugs - like, hexbear anonymous donations aren't as substitute for an org in that city or a food bank. We could at best cover a chunk of or entirerty of someone's rent once or, ironically, pay for someone's drugs a few times (why not, I like my own drugs like coffee and cigarettes and shit so why shouldn't someone struggling with cash get them) or maybe help with groceries a couple times. But we could never replace a food bank or a shelter or training programs or whatever, because we're an anonymous forum of mostly hard up for cash leftists.
There's also not a lot of mutual aid in the mutual aid comm - the amount of mutuality depending on someone needing short term financial help and then getting their feet unser later. Theres aid in the mutual aid comm, the amount which notwithstanding, but how can someone asking for food every day actually do the mutual part of mutual aid on an online anonymous forum? There's stuff they could actually do in person where they live but how would we direct that or have anything to do with that? Some of the stories people have also suggest they actually should stop trying to help the people around them and focus on their own survival - like maybe you can't have a roommate living with you in your car cause it's another mouth to feed. Or maybe you need to check in to an inpatient medical program if youre actually risking DKA and hypoglycemic events as often as the posts go up. There was one person who I recall in a, self disclosed, manic episode gave away a lot of their money to an ex or whatever and now couldn't afford rent. Like, whatever the circumstances, you're not in a position to be trying to help other people with money yet and so there's not really a mutual element.
An actual mutual aid network isn't just charity, like we'd ideally be organizing so that some frequent posters would be hooked into real programs that meet their actual needs - except we're anonymous too lol. Like it's a mess.
- An actual mutual aid network isn't just charity, like we'd ideally be organizing so that some frequent posters would be hooked into real programs that meet their actual needs - except we're anonymous too lol. Like it's a mess.
  If this was how the comm worked, I know about hella resources for people experiencing homelessness in Portland, but I've been hesitant to reach out in these posts because it might be "meta" to offer something other than money.
  I've still done so and I'm down to help anyone navigate these systems, but idk if anyone has followed up on any of it.
  
  Same, I have worked in case management for years and am decent at finding resources and navigating them for people but that isn't what's being asked for and I get nervous about coming off rude or something if I throw suggestions out there.
  
  Maybe we should implement an exception to the rule against meta posting for people who make multiple requests, indicating more of a chronic need than an acute one?
  
  I think providing other resources besides money is a good idea! Just the issue of doxxing people’s locations but could easily be DM’d instead
- This is something that concerns me and could come across as judgemental...
  There's a line between helping and enabling or exacerbating a problem. I'm not here to argue over what aid takes precedence but there's a clear difference between someone who is hungry and someone who is experiencing a medical emergency and the aid part doesn't necessarily always have to be money. Money isn't always the best form of help for every problem and the unofficial vibe in the comm is that it is and it doesn't matter what the people use it for if it helps even for a second. I'm not advocating for judging people's situations but we should be aiming to help in the most effective way possible with our limited resources.

Meta posting opens the door to shame and ridicule. I've already seen this happen by browsing the modlog a few times - it just got handled and i think that it's absolutely good it was handled. i think there's nothing to really say about MA that can't be discussed as issues arise, privately. For better or worse, there are people who enjoy wrecking stuff like it. Issues with specific users can be handled by mods and admins - a lot of what can be said about it would be to curtail or limit the function of MA - the additional burden would be suppressive of use.
Please don't give any room to the sorts who want to metapost about mutual aid - I'm sure some folks mean well, but it's just going to enable drama that doesn't need exist and will impede function
- I definitely get the instinct here, but the status quo is that metaposting is allowed (just not direct reply comments) and I count two metaposts in the past month. The one that incited this post, and one of someone thanking the donor who came through for them, weeks ago.
  I don't think that's an unmanageable level of metaposting or being done in bad faith. If they were proposing opening up more metaposting I'd agree with you but the question being posed is keep the status quo or shutting off all avenues for feedback or calling out anything, because the mods don't want to be the ones to handle concerns for ethical reasons. So that kind of nixes handling it privately.
  I appreciate that reactive comments just harassing people asking for help are deleted and agree we need to clamp down on those as strongly as possible, but I don't see that problem happening with posts, historically

Here's a dumb but honest question: what even is mutual aid, and how is it different from charity? Cause rn it looks like we are running a very disorganized charity for both regular community contributors, as well as people who use this site almost exclusively for the comm. Is the difference that the money goes straight to the recipient without any accountability or organization or records? Just wondering how this system is supposed to work.
- it looks like we are running a very disorganized charity
  Agreed it isn’t mutual aid right now it’s a charitable donation request form that works in the most obscure way possible. A real charity would do work to assess needs and ensure that resources went to those that require it most and to ensure a fair distribution, not just based on who posts most and has the most BUMP comments and bot triggers. I’m not presently sure it works how it should at all and I’m not sure Lemmy is the place for it due to the softwares design as a link aggregator.
- I've wondered this as well, often out loud in posts/comments. The urge to call our charity mutual aid just to make it "leftist" is a bad one, IMO. But there are some minor differences at least in theory. The idea is that it's a "pay it forward" kind of thing where we help eachother out when needed and then those people help others when they are able. But because of the realities of capitalist life I don't see that happening all that often. The people with the stability to send money regularly to randos from the internet tend to stay the same and the people with serious needs tend to stay the same. I think the only real difference in practice is that much of our donations goes to known community members, not random strangers. Does that make it mutual aid? idk, not really probably, but I appreciate it whatever we call it.
  I think about this in on the ground work as well. Many many orgs call their work mutual aid when its really just charity. But it feels very hard to ask anything of people who are destitute, even if involving them in the work sustaining them could be liberatory
- You could argue that what this community is usually doing isn't actually mutual aid. Mutual aid in most socialist theory says that help should never be a one way street, you should help e.g. house a homeless person but the homeless person should also help the organization keep afloat by helping cut costs or operate in whatever way is within their means. Our loose housing group obviously practices mutual aid, for example, some of the homeless people help cook homemade meals for the houses they're in to help reduce food costs or they help maintain a garden.
  I personally think that a homeless person having direct access to donors is better than a traditional charity. In some cases, this does not make sense (e.g. someone needs a very secure way of receiving funds due to threats to their life, many refugee organizations fall into this category and require security people on the payroll to safely help people). Charities are often middlemen that means test applicants for aid and pay out their board members with hundreds of thousands of dollars of cash, in many cases its a racket that uses donations to fund propaganda about how good these sorts of organizations are. Imagine if those hundreds of thousands of dollars were going to people that desperately needed it.

I think meta posts being allowed is good. There should be a way to make suggestions and such and meta posts allow that
I think there should be a one post a day rule. I've personally needed help and never posted because the current meta is to drown each other out. It makes an already stressful thing to do feel adversarial, and I don't want to be pushing other people down.
As for if there's people scamming? Of course there are this is the internet. Not much to be done about that without also potentially harming someone in need.

I feel like allowing meta posts is going to seed witch hunts and struggle sessions with real monetary stakes which feels gross. The post you're responding to is already fairly obviously some offline drama between a constellation of users. If the mods/admins want to take charge of "protecting the good people of mutual_aid" and allow people to report scammers, I think that's your guys prerogative, and whatever level of transparency you want to give to that is fine.
In general it's incredibly difficult to judge these kinds of things in an online anonymous board, and it would not be our place to moralize who is deserving of aid based on what will inevitably be internecine drama. Allowing for even the hint of purity testing is going to endanger the long term ability for people to access aid on the site, and create an even more unfair advantage for people who are known quantities which they could then also quite easily exploit.
In short, because we can't know, we shouldn't care and it's not our place to. Caveat emptor.

The forum structure of /c/mutual_aid means it functions like a charity market. All the issues we have were already addressed by sites like GoFundMe. Either force users to use sites like GoFundMe or start writing their systems into hexbear's codebase.
We can self crit all we want over it but in the end its a software issue.
- Gofundme has stuff in the background beyond softwar:, bank accounts, legal stuff. It's not just a fancy front-end. There are also reasons not to use gofundme for concerns of privacy and anonymity. A hexbear gofundme-like is interesting but would likely involve trusted admins, fraud, requirements on legal banking stuff (sanctions - some of which we may not wish to adhere to perhaps, reporting requirements, you know a whole bunch of shit that gofundme pays people to do). Given that we mightve lost the domain it's probably wise to not rely on a handful of trusted users to disburse funds or ensure those funds are being given properly if done so by some algorithm or automated software or whatever.
  I can see the motivation of seeing a semi live ticking up number on people's request for money but that's not the end all be all either. Mere trust and cashapp or whatever is probably the best its gonna be to preserve anonymous donors and anonymity for people asking for short term help.
  
  I'm not saying completely replicate GoFundMe. Certainly not the actual handling of money. My point is more strictly Lemmy is not built for this.

I think it is important to center people who use it; their opinions to me are more relevant in this situation than my own.

I feel like the current status quo of the comm is just demoralizing for all involved and I’m not really sure what could be done.
I can’t really speak for anyone seeking assistance, but as an outside observer it feels like people aren’t receiving as much help as they’d like or potentially could and I imagine it’s tiring having to make multiple posts a day with potentially little to show for it.
On the other end of things I think comrades looking to lend a hand can find it hard to know how best to do that. It’s hard to know sometimes who has already been helped and who is falling through the cracks. So I think it can be overwhelming for potential donators and unfortunately discourages people from doing so.
I can’t speak to the administrative or moderation side of things or what would be feasible, but I have some interest in trying to make the comm more effective for everyone involved.
Hopefully other people share their input in ways they think things could be improved.
Idk if that’s the point of this thread or it’s just about meta stuff or whatever…
- It's really the main issue with the internet, lack of transparency. Anyone can easily make multiple accounts and also there's no way to verify anything about any of it really. At least when I do direct aid locally I can tell that the person is in a bad way pretty quickly. No one on the streets here is faking it and it's just not the case on the internet. I'd love to direct my resources to leftists where possible but I haven't got a lot to spare so I'm probably going to focus on local direct aid.
- What specific changes would you make?
  We already ask that posters include if they have had their request met to help communicate who has been helped already.
  Having moderators decide who is or isn't a scammer shifts responsibility from the user wanting to donate to the moderator team which at this point violates the spirit of the community in so far as we as a mod try not to influence individual fundraising efforts.

I mostly donate to Palestinian gofundmes because I figured scammers would get more money by pretending to be an Israeli having a panic attack because they saw a Palestinian flag once on top of, you know, them trying to survive a genocide. I don't think there's any real way to distinguish between a sincere person and a scammer in an anonymous forum.

Posts similar to the one that prob. initiated this discussion shouldn't be allowed on that comm. Such claims can't really be verified either way and just lead to drama.
And more of an observation: Use of the comm was pretty rare for a long time, but it's increased dramatically as time has gone on. I think hexbears with both the desire and means to donate was always a pretty small group due to the site's similarly small size, and said group's limited funds are increasingly stretched across both more requests and the rising cost of living in general, leading to a higher chance of some requests going partially or wholly unfulfilled. I suppose I'm saying this to let those seeking help know that, if that happens to them, it's not necessarily a lack of caring, there's just unfortunately only so much money to to go around and they had unlucky timing. It's no one's fault, just a reality of capitalism sadly.

If someone wants to donate and not publicize on their account, they could report the post with a message saying "I've DMd this user", which goes right to the mods and admins, who could create a comment on their behalf "A user has sent you a DM". Just something that came to mind just now. Obviously, that puts mods in the loop, which is more work, so take that into account. This obviously works best on the web interface, some apps have canned report options, not sure if all of them have a freeform box to enter text into.
- could be automated with a bot. better than having individual mods in the loop IMO
  
  Some tasks sound easy to automate but not always, better to prove the system is useful first with mods in the loop, and if the volume becomes a burden automation can be investigated.

In case this feedback is relevant, the comm has been abused by certain members spamming posts multiple times per day every day, so I blocked it 🤷
- I don't think those desperate to have basic needs met is on the same level as having to scroll past posts if this is supposedly a space inhabited by leftists that care about marginalized people. As someone who's experienced homelessness I can understand not wanting to get to that point because it becomes exponentially harder to leave it once you're there.
  
  Yeah. When I post multiple times a day, it’s because I really need help and nobody is…helping me.
- Is that an abuse? or just a consequence of the format making it so posts get easily drowned out?

i think i know about the post you're referring to and while i don't know about the veracity of that user's claims (i didn't really engage with that post) my initial thought on it is that those types of claims should be sent directly to the mod team rather than to the community, because of the potential of abuse.
no matter the circumstances of need i would like to believe that everyone who is asking for help is because they need help, and don't want to judge, nor do i feel like anyone is in a position to judge the worthiness of people to receive aid.
if there is a problem with "scammin" well ... then that's a big issue, but not one that should be hashed out in the forum because it could quickly get messy and just feels very against what the community stands for.
thanks fer askin, that's my .02
- Having accusations directly sent to the mod team shifts responsibility from the user wanting to donate to the moderator team, which at this point violates the spirit of the community in so far as we as a mod try not to influence individual fundraising efforts.
  
  So I have a question regarding that: there were some semi-regular posts in the MA Comm a few months ago, I won’t say which specifically, but they highly resembled certain scams I’ve seen online. At the time I kept mum, but I am curious if “I think this might be a scam” messages to the mods are treated differently than “This post has X, Y, and Z, which is documented at such-and-such as being associated with scammers” messages. Or if the mods are 100% agnostic on that front (no pun intended).
  
  right, then I've a mind that no accusations should be sent. i get people being upset, shit is dire. but while i understand, it just doesn't sit right. even if people are misrepresenting who they are i don't think they makes em less worthy, i don't get to judge why they're doin it. are they taking money outta months of the other people who need help? i don't think so. i don't think there's a set # of peeps putting out a set # of dollars. i donate to people when i can, that's the rule i use. i donate less lately cuz... well, take a look at my new name and guess...
  if no one wants to vet worthiness and —to be clear— no one should be, then we're right back where we started: no posts attacking other users. those should be treated same as those smarmy judgin comments i see sometimes: straight to the effin modlog and a warning sent that reminds people of the spirit of this space
- The scamming bit is also difficult to sus out due to the nature of the forum. Most people find taking donations to be demeaning and stressful, scammers are a minority. The only way a donator could assuage their concerns is by talking with the person that needs help about the situation, really.
  If only we didnt have capitalism, itd be much easier for the state to help people.
  
  Trying to determine who is scamming would also mean defining what constitutes a scam or not. Which for certain obvious definitions like okay sure but trying to draw a distinction where it's less clear is just means testing. Trying to clearly define a line of who is allowed to ask for help and who isn't is neoliberalism of the highest order

i think maybe it would help if people knew when donation goals were being met. like if we had a basic verification system that kind of worked on the honor system it might help. something like this:
user posts request with amount,
donator comments something like "DM Sent",
user updates after amount is received
i can think of a few issues so far:
some people lurk/donate without posting
there may be opsec issues we could fix by encouraging donator alts
it may deincentivize people from donating to those who aren't using the system
i'd like some input on how to fix the issues because i do think we can fix the transparency issues and make people more confident donating

Is there a way we could sticky a thread for meta discussion of mutual aid posts so at least they're all contained? I know users including myself have had feelings about the comm and there really isn't a good way to express them as it stands. Completely not allowing criticism (good or bad) is why a lot of us left other social media platforms and I'd hate for this place to get that way. I'm also not "online" enough to know if there already is a mechanism in place for what I'm talking about. If there is, maybe it should be more apparent to people like me who have a more luddite approach to the Internet.
- We could community feature (pin/sticky) a meta discussion post in the mutual aid community and seems to be a good compromise between what the current rule is and what the proposed change is

I think regular education about mutual aid would be helpful. For example, while anonymity does mean capacity for harm and then reacting meta posts, look at what happens when donating to, e.g., charities: you end up mostly paying for PMC paychecks and tax breaks for corpos. Edit: maybe adding an explainer comment pinned in every mutual aid post would be a good way to implement this.
I do think that having a vouching system is the best way and my understanding is that this is basically the status quo to some extent. You may want to define some kind of unvouching process in cases where there are verifiable issues. I think this will actually increase trust and donations if communication and messaging are on-point.
So re: meta posts, I think there needs to be more process, not just allowing meta posts and comments. This requires more mod intervention, so I'm sorry to be basically volunteering others' time, but I do think it will be beneficial to have meta posts go through a filter and deliberative process and with clear results and strategic messaging. The alternative, i.e. status quo, is likely to be ad hoc discouragement. The coupling of "this is why you should keep helping our comrades" to any meta posts is very important.