I think one of the most important parts of your statement is that you took the time to research where you chose to give. It is essential that giving be thoughtful and researched. All too many people feel like they are doing their part of they gave to whoever hit them up last, or if they give to one of the foundations that simply redistribute, after fees, the money to groups the giver does not select. It is possible to give 10% and have the money be entirely wasted.

It is also not necessary to give your 10% in cash. Time and commitment to local charities can be way more valuable than cash.

I personally think a 10% vow without commitment to research the beneficiary can in fact be harmful. How can it be harmful? Two reasons: 1) your cash might be wasted on ineffective organizations and 2) giving without thought gives people an excuse to avoid involvement and thus can encourage disengagement with charity.

I like the idea of branding and institutionalizing tithing outside of religious communities. Setting up the infrastructure could be pretty easy. It could be run through a dedicated foundation or, even simpler, through one of the donor advised funds. Direct deductions from paycheck can be set up with little difficulty. I think it would be more powerful if you link to or provide tools that require the giver to research the recipient.

And, John... we could become a giving commons that focuses on informed investing. A networking commons that looks for ways to invest around a shared set of principles known to generate uplift and sustainability.

7 such principles (or a different perspective in giving):

These are the 7 values, benchmarks and indicators mapped during my listening tour with the Annie E. Casey Foundation. They map what I observed to work in sustaining and replicating what works in community, youth and ecconomic development.

I personally dedicate 100% of my time to enabling these concepts locally and globally. And, my husband and I donate around 20% of our income to support these concepts. With the highest percentage of funds going to support individuals who are supporting others in developing these skills.

My dream is to form a Giving Commons that supports this work and has the capacity to understand strategic investments based on these principles and outcomes.

Welcome to the initial `10% Club`_ discussions, Mr. Berger! We look forward to exchanging ideas with you...

Well said, John: "I think one of the most important parts of your statement is that you took the time to research where you chose to give. It is essential that giving be thoughtful and researched."

Agreed. A connected/interactive approach to giving makes for a more rewarding and compelling experience. While the the 10% Club meme's diffusion will be achieved through networked momentum, the very structure of the 10% Club concept relies on very intimate, individual philanthropic effort.

Research of the beneficiary is a neccessary given. Aside from maximizing productivity of donation and even avoidance of fraud, such quest for information allows for the formation of a relationship with the cause or agency. Thankfully, there are a number of movements dedicated to facilitating such research. Two well organized examples of such are:

• CharityNavigator.org (rubric: 'Your guide to intelligent giving')
• Give.org (through the Better Business Bureau)

As for "...Time and commitment...", also a good point. The valuation of such is very important. The economics of time and expenditure of mental; physical energy are indeed vital aspects of the giving process. Kindly consider two initial aspects based on this:

1. 10% can be viewed as a switch, activating a notion of deliberate and regular giving. As Darlene mentioned above: "The 10% vow is just one PART of a larger transformation for each individual." The % aspect allows for a measurable, trackable, and consistent reference for the giver.
2. Combined with time and energy, financial donation allows for philanthropic 'multitasking'. Within any network, be it O-Net, your family, community, state, globe... focus within a certain assigned or chosen role becomes critical to achievement/productivity. As a practical example:

'Ms. Smith' has dedicated the brunt of her time and energy to raising her family AND the empowerment of disabled children at a local level. Her choice to give monetarily would allow for simultaneous action, say, to natural disaster victims (without compromise to her family and work objectives).

JB, your mention of "...branding... institutionalizing... infrastructure..." touches on some exciting queries.

• What strategies (using existing or creative marketing) can be used to bring The 10% Club to the public eye?
• How is such a giving action made easy and efficient while avoiding "disengagement with charity"?
• Is an 'across the board accountability/governance necessary? How?

'Link Bibliography'

Meme - http://www.rubinghscience.org/memetics/dawkinsmemes.html

Hello all! Happy to see a bit of discussion here.:)

John, ideally the 10% would never be alloted to one beneficiary. One of the most important aspects of the 10% vow that I would like to try to express is an emphasis on individual flexibility and active involvement...a continual openess to All happening around the world. Because the money is given continually in smaller 'chunks', one can give to emergency relief today and to a particular sustainable micro-enterprise next week (or whenever more money is received), and then to help fund an omidyar.net dropcash project, ad infinitum. The 10% vow would hopefully enable the giver to feel much more Able to participate in and nourish as Many causes as touch their heart....and never succumb to 'donor fatigue'.

I would be against the idea of setting up a 'direct deduction' system from a paycheck because it would rob the giver of one of the most rewarding and transformational aspects of the vow which is their practice of individual openess, readiness, and searching for new ways to help.

And as previously said, this can be done ALONG WITH any volunteering of time or additional giving. The cash donation allows our arms of giving to be longer and simultaneously reach places we wouldn't be able to with our local service. Personally I love to use my donations most often to fund and support volunteers working in developing countries. In that way it is as if I have many arms all working at once...;)

Julie, welcome!:)

Julie said: "I personally dedicate 100% of my time to enabling these concepts locally and globally. And, my husband and I donate around 20% of our income to support these concepts. With the highest percentage of funds going to support individuals who are supporting others in developing these skills."

That is what I would call 'highly engaged'.:) And I think that on ONet, a majority of members are medium to highly engaged in giving and creating a better world. A main goal of The 10% Club is just to create a visible structure connecting all those with a dedication and commitment to this, a growing visible network that will hopefully inspire more and more to pay attention and want to participate as well. The common denominator is the 10%pledge...for some that will be the least of their efforts, for others it is just the beginning of an exploration. I am hoping to nurture the seed of the 10% club here amongst those who are already so obviously devoted and for whom the 10%pledge will be an easier commitment. But the real hope is that this will develop in its visual presentation to be something very simple and compelling to spread to include those who are Not yet engaged..outSIDE of ONet....and spark off ripples of transformation.

I love your idea of a commons...if I see it right as a sort of support structure for donors and social entrepenuers? In a way I see it as refining the looser purpose of omidyar.net with a dedicated subgroup of 'helpers' and funding, is this correct? As applied to the 10%...I think that the 10% is still best as a base and flexible individual exercise...but 10%ers would Certainly benefit from the dialogue and resources that a giving commons could provide. In all honesty I am a bit lost in the wording of the giving commons at this time but I look forward to seeing it evolve. It is perhaps akin to me looking a bit cluelessly at the very necessary coding being developed for a complex program before the user-friendly interface is put on.But I 'see' the program will be very useful.does that make sense?;)We will talk more about this on your gc thread.I'm reading more about it to understand.

I don’t think a direct deduction would “rob the giver” as you fear. A direct deduction is not the same as a direct donation. Automatic deduction will result in accumulation of money to give – but would not itself be the gift. With a donor advised fund the donations can build up for a while giving the donor the ability to give larger amounts by accumulating donations before designating the beneficiary. It also gives the donor more time to research while still having made the 10% commitment.

Brent: A full answer to some of your questions would require multiple pages. The nice thing about an idea like this is that it would be relatively low cost to implement and have low maintenance costs. This means you can afford to grow slowly and choose less expensive marketing options.

You ask a key question: “How is such a giving action made easy and efficient while avoiding "disengagement with charity"? This, I think, connects to some of the “network” ideas discussed in other places on Omidyar. Formula based systems like CharityNavigator.org are only as good as the data they use and unfortunately the data is fairly weak. There is no substitute for personal experience. I place more value in personal observations on how a charity functions than on any publication or data they can send me. It seems that using current internet sites it is a lot easier to find negative information about a charity that it is to find well thought out and positive or comparative information. Are we talking trust based rating systems here? (he says in an overt attempt to fit in with the jargon of the site)

10 Percent Club... very nice indeed.

It's along similar lines, but different, cool and unique in its own way, to what is envisioned with Better World Brand for business and Charity-a-Day for individuals. Dig the great logo too, well done.

Julie C, We are very happy to have your insight as part of this discussion. Your husband Dave and yourself are truly inspirational examples of 'walking the talk/doing as you say'. Many aspects of the giving commons' 7 principles certainly and naturally mesh with the 10% Club.

John B,

"would require multiple pages"...

Your book will be at the top of my Amazon Wish List! ;) Was just throwing those questions out there as they have been rattling about in our heads. The beauty of modern networking will indeed be our best ally.

Mark G, Nice to see you here... Your threads were among the 1st I explored and enjoyed on Omidyar Network upon my recent join-up. The ned thread itself is a beautiful example of how O-Net can fuse unique component ideas in forming an 'organism'. Such a collective mobilization will prove to be the very life breath of the 10% Club.

The 10% Club isn't affiliated with the Mile High Club, is it?

Anyway, I've got mixed feelings on the 10% thing. My main baggage has to do with my conservative Christian upbringing and hearing ten thousand sermons on tithing. 10%/tithing -- it's all pretty formulaic to me.

My two rebuttals (offered in peace) are:

1. Not everyone can afford to give away 10%. On a single income, with three young girls, in an expensive part of the country, our family can't afford to give 10% right now. There have been times in our marriage when we've given more than 10%, and I'm certain we'll have opportunity to exceed that in the future. I met a man a couple years ago who was stuck in the tithing rut, and couldn't make ends meet. I said jokingly that it sounded like he should donate his tithe back to himself, but he didn't find that amusing.
2. It's how the gift is given, not how much. We all know the little parable of the widow's mite. She is considered generous not because of the quantity of her gift, but because it's sincere and from the heart. Pulling out a calculator and figuring out the ten percent we owe (and I know that's not what you're advocating) kills the heart-side of things. But I pull another little bit of truth out of the widow's mite parable. Notice that she doesn't give ten percent -- she gives everything.

I'm always a supporter of giving. I wish that I gave more. (I try to avoid the sentence, "I wish I could give more" because we can always give a bit more.) I like what you're pushing for, but for me, I've got to keep the calculator on my desk.

Howdy Luke... thanks for dropping in!

In response to your question, ..."affiliated with the Mile High Club, is it?" - As this is a family show, let's just say that we're trying to keep it a bit more 'down to earth'. Neither is the 10% Club a micro version of a steering wheel lock as someone else had suggested off the record. :P

You mentioned, "Not everyone can afford to give away 10%." Although I have no children {BTW great selling toys for Katrina pic} at this point, in spite of an 84 hour workweek and thriftiness, I still hover about the USA's 'poor' definition, so I can empathize. I wholeheartedly believe, however, that the issue comes down to the relative scale of financial challenges. Even if you view the World Bank's absolute poverty definitions as conservative, we are still talking about 1 out of 6, or 1.1 billion people unable to meet the most basic requirements of food, shelter, clean water, sanitation, or health care. Hypothetical example: if one of my family members was in need of an immediate life or death surgery, I would FIND a way to pay it, regardless of the cost or my current finances. Credit cards, quadruple jobs, door to door solicitation, whatever. Such is the plight of our global family in the face of extreme poverty. Using this scale-based perspective helps me to realize that I can afford 10 cents on the dollar (even if I have to extend my own credit as a form of microenterprise loan) to immediately assist in such dire - life or death matters.

With regard tithing, Note that, although individual members of the 10% Club may from time to time recognize certain common strands of goodness (seemingly threaded through the basis of most religions), the 10 % Club is in no way affiliated with or acting under the banner of any specific religious sect.

I am warm to your expression "the heart-side of things". The 10% figure can certainly be a helpful organizational reference... a tangible numeric association. However that's where the mechanical/formulaic aspect ends. The process of allocation becomes a very intimate and heartfelt connection to specific areas of need that move each individual. This experiment is a meeting ground for the quality and, yes, also (especially again by the beauty of both traditional and modern networking) the quantity of giving.

Luke, I'm glad you took time to contribute here, and can see some of your points being included within our in progress concern/FAQ list (with your permission, of course).

'Link Bibliography'

absolute poverty definitions- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2944885.stm

You're right, Brent, that we are as wealthy as gods. Certainly things are relative, but we grow awfully used to the extras and bonuses of a war-free (at least here), job-filled country. If you told me ten years ago that I'd have a mortgage and live in a $500,000 house, I'd tell you that you were smokin' some pretty good weed. And, here I am, mortgaged, living in a $500,000 house. Ten years ago, of course, a half-million dollar house, in my mind, was an estate on eight acres, complete with servants and automatic bidets. Now, it's a small three-bedroom home that needs a lot of work, and it's well over $100,000 below the median price here in San Diego. (A friend just sold a nice four-bedroom home, under 3,000-sq.ft., in an okay little neighbourhood, but still 25 miles outside of the city, for $1.1 million. Egads.) Still, no matter what kind of home you're talking about, it's more than most of the world can imagine.

So, what do we do? Sell our homes, take the equity and provide the money to people who really need it? Yes, that's probably what we should do.

When I was younger, I was big about making vows. For years I carried around a little "vow paper" (sealed in cellophane tape) with some of these ideals that I would never break: I would never earn more than $50 a day; I would never own more than I could put in the back of a pickup; at least half my belongings would be books; stuff like that. Today I spend more than $50 a day just on my mortgage; I might be able to fit all our kids' toys in the back of a pickup.

Life is a friggin' paradox. We should give it all away; we can't give it all away.

Some days I feel like my father, barking across the table when I didn't want to eat my cold peas. "There are children in China..." I don't say it, but I feel it. My girls have every luxury they want (except Bratz dolls) and they seldom finish their peas. I want them to understand that they are blessed, that everyone they have ever met is blessed, and that countless millions in the rest of the world look enviously through our windows.

All that said, I think I'll join your 10% club, as long as you don't mind having a member that at the present would have a tough time making his dues. I promise to withhold my hypocritical vote on things, of course.

Hi Luke!:)

I actually see the widow's might parable as illustrating how we all would be able to give 10% (or more), reGardless of our financial situation. The beauty was that she gave everything she had....and this was more noble a gesture than just giving out of 'what's left over' or only when we have plenty to go around.

The 10% concept is specifically and intentionally not an 'amount'...it is a percentage, which is to say that it is adjustable to every financial level. If someone only has $5.00, they are giving 50cents to those who have less, and that gesture of remembrance and cooperation is just as magnanimous as somone donating 10% of their riches..perhaps more so. The choice to have it be sincere is within us...it's never intrinsic to a tool or system. Whether 10% is given mindfully or mindlessly is still up to the individual...we can only hope to provide encouragement that it be mindful.

Brent's comment of relative poverty was very important I think. The minute I think I can't give, I'm faced with awareness of a situation which reminds me of my relative richness and I realize that given the beautiful life and freedoms I have I cannot Not give. Does that make sense?

Darlene, it's interesting but I found it easier to give proportionally more when I made less. Though we give more now, it's a lower percentage. But when I divide my income by five (wife and dependents), I'm making far less than I did in my first job, post-college. So, mathematics is a tricky thing. Anyway, I know that 10% is what we should be able to do, but at this point mathematics isn't our friend. Will the situation change? Yes.

I agree with you -- our relative richness is something that we have to wake every morning and meditate on. My life is beautiful. I am free. And it's out of that realization that we have the freedom to give.

Luke... did you account for what you spent going to SD at part of your 10% donation...? Do you count your time volunteering here at O.net?

When I say I give 100% of my time... I can say this because every action becomes an action in accordance to "my vows" (which I do my daily best with). Thus truely being with my grandson meets this vow. If I only gave to others and not to my family (something I was in part guitly of when my daughter was litte)this would be out of alignment with my vows.

When Dave and I did our taxes this past year we recorded 20% of our income as tax-deductable expenses. Some of that was giving some really good stuff to Good Will. Half was the amount deducted from our office space (1,000 sq of our 3,000 foot house). Part was small and larger donations to good causes. And, part was sending me to Singapoore where I volunteered a month with Singapoore community centers and their organizers.

IRS won't let you write off volunteer time, so the 200 hours I volunteered in 2003 to help Mobilizing America's Youth develop their plan and connect them with national leaders didn't get recorded. That goes into the 100% of my time. Something that I would actually like to get paid for so I can donate more money!

Or, the 40 hours I volunteered here at O.net for helping raise $4,000... again it's a time donation.

For federal grants, they allow $15.00 per hour itemized volunteer time to qualify for their in-kind match.

Each year, I volunteer for something important to me. This last year, it has been working here at O.net. Yes, working here. Whether recorded or appreciated I see at least half of what I do here as work! And, the other half, be it play, is done with a mind of helping others.

With that said, you won't see me as much from this month on, because I'm not finding O.net as in line with my mission as I once thought it to be. Instead, I'm going to give more time to organizing the Elko, Peace Park and writing up the findings from the Annie E. Casey Listening Tour.

In 2003 and 2004 it was hospice!

So time, talents, treasures and 10% can take on many meanings...

PS: Note, this thread is one of 4 threads that I've posted at in the past week.

For the record, our non-profit, Emerging Futures Foundation is a 501c3/509 (public charity foundation)... has been set up to help ordinary people do good things. If anyone here is interested in working with our non-profit status, we can collect and distribute funds as well as set up a trust for you/your initiatives -- until you have your own status or if you just want to work as a cooperative, that's good too.

Drop me a PM as need be.

For me this whole topic is interesting not because Luke can or cannot give 10%. It's interesting that he's having these thoughts and discussions with us and with his family. And it's interesting for me to be having these thoughts and discussions as well. For me it's not at all about the outcome, but about the process. For some it's really easy to say that anyone, in any circumstance, anytime, can give 10%. Might be just as easy to say that anyone can choose to eat 10% less meat and thereby reduce impact on the planet by x%. Or drive 10% less or fly 10% less or whatever. It's not about saying it for others. It's about saying for self and then sharing that with others. That's inspiring to me. We all make our own choices, and there are contradictions for all of us, like Luke describes. Good stuff, all of it, as long as we become more and more aware that our actions matter, and that we're working on becoming more the people we want to be. Excellent!

that was beautifully and wisely put, Ted.

Thank you Ted, Luke, Julie, Brent and Darlene. My first comments were lost in the ether two days ago, but after reading Luke's personal questions around this issue I feel far more captured by this thread.

I don't think any of us would have a problem showing that 10% of our time is dedicated to the world beyond ourselves and our little nests. Our interactions in the Food Chain and elsewhere are just a small reflection of that. Most of us here give a great deal of ourselves over and beyond the money.

But how do you do the accounting? How do you know when enough is enough to give?

For the last two years I've been a monk of sorts; after leaving paycheck world every new client and project has been an adventure. About half of my projects are probono, most of those falling under the Amoration umbrella. For me it was essential to start a nonprofit venture to help me do the accounting for all of the little community projects that kept growing bigger than my bank account would allow.

I almost never tell people what to pay me, encouraging them to compensate me as they see fit for services provided. In turn I can't imagine going through my finances to see if at least 10% went to aid causes. For me it's an intuitive sense of balance -- at least 10% gives me a baseline to work from when I'm feeling offkilter.

Right now we're going through intense discussions within our intentional community on what it means to be a member of a collective dedicated to art and activism. What parts of ourselves do we give to ourselves, our home, our community? These are great questions for all of us to answer as we reflect this very important piece of awareness-building.

A bigger question to consider is how do we embody and share this with others in a way that does not feel preachy, that comes from the heart of why we do it.

Hi Evonne!:) Thanks for poppin in to the discussion!

• "A bigger question to consider is how do we embody and share this with others in a way that does not feel preachy, that comes from the heart of why we do it."

Whew.THAT is one of the main challenges I'm struggling with since the start of this experiment years ago. It was easier in some ways not to share. Then it was harder. Now it's both.;)

For the first maybe year and a half of my 10%ing it was just me donating and becoming more and more involved in the idea of microphilanthropy and support systems...without telling anyone around me(except Brent of course). It was good, but after a while it felt like I was hiding The most nourishing and magical activity in my life... and that started to feel selfish (especially when you keep in mind the Pier10dream/vision).

Because although a big part of it is personal process, the crux still lies to me in the idea of stimulating Cooperative Effectiveness in areas that need help. (In that way I find it so hard to let go of the outcome, Ted, though I know it's healthier.) But with all these efforts..the more people contributing seems definitely the better. My giving 12bucks out of the 120 that landed in my hands is great, but it really gets to bloom when I see how COMBINED with the small donations of others a whole new school was built in Togo. Or the donation towards the Evonne's Amoration studio was nice..but it kindof remains latent and ineffective until a whole bunch more people donate and it's able to bloom. When you think of how small the donation can be if there were many involved..what is it that stops us?

So I'm living life in this great big network...and I see that saying "ooh I found a great cheap pair of shoes at ___, how fun" results in a bunch of friends going to ___, ....why on earth wasn't I trying to communicate the things that really matter to me and that would benefit so much from more participation?

But of course I found it was a lot easier to talk about shoes with people. If/when I talked about my 10% donations (whether face2face or through my blog or whatever) I find I tend to get 3 very different types of responses a lot:

1. that's why you'll never have 'enough' money/I'll never get ahead if I do that/I don't have 'enough' money to do that

2.Good people making defensive itemizations of current time/money allocations (this makes me feel awful because I Don't want to trigger that and it seems I always do.please help):(

3.and then a bunch of " wow, how inspiring- I'm going to try it."(which makes me figure wow I should keep going even if I think I must be expressing it badly getting the first 2 responses so much).

So I plug away...trying to refine the idea in discussion and presentation. And you guys are helping.

The 10%Club is not about itemizing and counting all the good things you do in your life. For the record I'm here on ONet because I find you all amazingly inspiring and devoted to a Better World and I positively love to be here amongst you. The 10%donation concept is simply one more tool I'd like to bring to the table IF you want to try it because I find it to be really amazing for the multi-tasking reasons Brent mentioned and more. And I really think it's a SIMPLE tool, one that doesn't require a calculator or exhausting backaccounting on past finances. You don't OWE anything. Let's try to get out of that mentality. It's only a forward thought- each time you find you recieve some money in your life, why not try sending a percentage of it as a gift to help support someone Else's project that you believe in? You keep working on your projects and volunteering time and love ad infinitum...but the 10% is like growing and maintaining a flexible additional arm... able to nurture endless other projects simultaneously.

For overexample, some might say how can I think of the Amoration studio when I need to do something about the Sudan. Awareness can be exhausting! The 10% concept is designed to help you FEEL you Can help both and more all while you live your life and give your time to myriad things.

I like to see it as our ability to water seeds in a vast garden. We already do that with our time here on ONet and in various projects we undertake, why not also see how easy it can be to support the very real financial needs of various projects all over the world- IF we work together and each of us gets into a beautiful pulse of micro-donations to wherever there is need?

Wow, such depth on this. Thank you Darlene.

I have found in my personal 10% pursuit that there's a BIG part of me that needs to feel like I'm creating a better world. That pursuit for the best possible means of cultural transformation has now taken over my life; be careful or it'll happen to you too! It requires much more than a 10% investment of my energy, time and resources but if I can look at each day and see a gift given to the greater community then I feel more tuned and balanced with the world around me. It's important to feel around and find healthy benchmarks for giving that leave room for selfcare and the health of your home and basic connections too.

The accounting isn't important; it's the heart of consistent practice that we're honing here. The 10% baseline is nothing new to those of us who grew up in some tithing churches nor should it be considered tiresome or useless doctrine. It's a simple way to remind ourselves to stay engaged with the world beyond our homes, beyond the places we know and understand.

Reading Christina's posts from Uganda today made me quite aware of the places in me that are still afraid to go there, the scared kid that want to run when gunfire starts. I've seen how effective microloans can be yet I still rarely give enough to make a huge difference on my own. The best I can do is try to be wise in my giving decisions, using the resources at my disposal to the best benefit of the whole around me. Investing in the world is just as important as investing in oneself.

Darlene's motion toward gift consolidation means a lot coming from the NGO management end. As a development director for int'l aid orgs I've seen how thousands of $20 gifts can make a HUGE impact. Since starting my own NGO I've tried to find alternate currencies that leave room for many different types of gifts but I find that money is still the prime indicator when it comes to helping people find a simple measure for global engagement.

Encouraging a dynamic and integrated philosophy of giving is vital; it's helpful to think through the concrete ways that you can be most beneficial to the causes you care about most. We all have many different types of resources at our disposal -- money may be very scarce but your employer may have access to tens of thousands in donated goods to share. Think broader in your circles to all of the places that may want to share in your giving and don't be afraid to share your causes and cares with them.

It's nice to be heard and appreciated. Thanks for talking and thanks for listening.

One of the major things the 10%Club concept hopes to remedy is a very serious problem called 'Donor Fatigue'. Big Spurts and exhausted stops. And it's the stops can mean the death and suffering of tens of thousands of people right now in Pakistan .

PLEASE join me in trying to inundate Amazon.com with emails requesting a donation button be put up on their site for the holiday shopping season. Remember that a simple thing like that helped raise 12.5 Million dollars for Katrina victims! I wrote a Letter Draft/Template post with contact info and am asking folks to please take a few moments to send an email and spread the word? It could mean so much!

"It's a desperate situation," says Barbara Agnew, a Northwest Medical Teams spokeswoman. "The weather, the lack of access, the lower levels of donations -- almost a kind of apathy from the public -- are all contributing to a dismal prospect for these people that are suffering."

Thank you Darlene, let's do this. This has been pressing on me, burning a big hole lately.....how do we take this to the next level with Amazon? Can we provide a simple emergency care game/service that allows people to feel good, connected, engaged in the giving process?

Amazon doesn't see the value in giving up precious online real estate to Pakistani care if most people are already feeling fatigued. For them to make this happen it needs to add value to their business and perhaps bring attention/new people to the table. How can 10% club take this email request campaign to the next level?

The 10% club could potentially address not only donor fatigue, but donor fickleness. One problem that many nonprofits encounter when Katrinas hit is a loss of regular funding. For a donor it might not seem like a loss to take your $100 monthly donation and send it toward the current world emergency, but when a hundred donors do that, even for just a month, it can devastate small grassroots organizations that depend on small, regular donations.

I'm big about sticking with a few organizations month after month, and then giving where needed as well. And I never shortchange those regular charities to support the more critical emergencies.

Maybe one of your principles (see, I haven't officially joined yet) could be 50% going to regular causes and 50% going into an emergency, flexible, spontaneous fund.

And have to say that I echo your concern about Pakistan. Mornings are getting cold where we live, and each morning when I wake up and start a fire, I think about those people living in tents (if they're lucky) with no fuel whatsoever. It's terrifying. Is it just donor fatigue, or is it donor prejudice?

Donor blindness too. How many images have you seen coming out of Pakistan as an EDUCATED MEDIA CONSUMER? Most people have seen or heard nothing on it since it happened. We're in the loop in some small way and it still feels like there's very little attention given because it's not in our backyard, it's not relevant like the entertainment news ;-)

International aid usually becomes a public issue when combined with the entertainment news; celebrity plays a key role because they serve as our public role models for what to care about. If our stars are seen always shopping and playing golf the people will want to do the same; when Angelina Jolie goes to Africa or Cambodia and posts dynamic videologs more young women want to go out into the field too.

Coverage of the current world emergency is largely dependent on severity, proximity and potential for a repeat performance or new story angles. Most of the primary channels for information flow from NY to DC, Atlanta and the south of the US, so anything in this region is likely to be milked for ages even while other more severe stories are ignored.

News coverage moves in cycles; hurricane season is ending and there aren't many good Katrina cleanup stories coming out now so attention will naturally shift to snow and ice season. There are a slew of holiday charities that specialize in being out this time of year (santa's ringing his bell, ya know) so we turn over the show to holiday appeal season.

Media literacy aside, there are many layers to understanding the heart, nature, cycles and rhythms of giving. I think it's great to set benchmarks but recognize that they may end up causing conflict when intuition says that it's time to give a lifechanging gift to one group because something extraordinary is happening that you must help provide for.

Looking at the Omidyar Network model may offer good structural ideas. I understand they will be making major gifts totalling many hundreds of millions in the coming years, the most recent being the new micro programs @ Tufts. They seem to hold a small stable of steady support closely tied to their mission. New opportunities literally fall in their lap and they occasionally reward good ideas that arise. There is both concern for emergency situations and a recognized desire to create permanent solutions for many millions of people.

Would I balance my giving differently in their shoes? Likely so in some cases, but each of us brings our own passions to the table the same way that each group takes on a specific mission in the world.

I encourage EVERYONE to make a personal mission statement. Let your mission guide your giving and your engagements at every level. The easiest way to feel charged and ready for life is to find complimentary forces and move forward together. Give what you can and receive graciously.

The bond of giving remains hard to get on TV or while sitting at home in a myopic stare; this is the gulf that we bridgebuilders face to inspire openness and giving.