I do ask that comments be civil and respectful--no flame wars in the threads, please!--but beyond that, it's all good!
The Freedom Convoy would have an uphill battle to launch a lawsuit against GoFundMe. Their terms of service include a binding arbitration clause that could be hard to circumvent.
Donors who don't get a refund promptly should notify their state attorney general. With several states already investigating GoFundMe for possible fraud and deceptive practices, this is likely to end up as a criminal rather than civil litigation.
But beyond that, alternatives such as Give Send Go are getting a huge boost in publicity and credibility. GoFundMe might not get sued out of existence, but a loss of new fundraising business could prove just as lethal.
Givesendgo has terms of service prohibiting unlawful activity, so I imagine they could rescind the fundraiser also if they chose to. In a quick search I wasn't able to find who owns Givesendgo. It's incorporated in Delaware where, to my knowledge, ownership information is available only for a fee. None of which prevented me from donating to the effort, but I would be happier if I could send funds directly to Tamara Lich.
I wonder whether whoever leaned on Gofundme will also be able to effectively lean on Givesendgo.
As a practical matter any entity wanting to facilitate fundraising is going to reserve the right to distance themselves from a particular fundraiser if they so desire. It would be a foolish business decision not to have that cutout just as a means of self preservation.
Which is why the hue and cry over such acts as freezing the Kyle Rittenhouse fundraiser was fairly muted--GoFundMe showed an outrageous double standard but it was still their choice to make and they didn't monkey with the funds.
This time they tried to take the money away from the donors. Punishing the innocent third party doesn't sit well even with most outwardly liberal types. You have to be rabidly ideological to be okay with that behavior, and on both sides of the political spectrum most individuals are not rabidly ideological.
sort of related: This reminds me a little bit of the Robinhood/Wall Street Bets Redditor kerfuffle. Just stop the trading to protect the powerful. Rig the game in plain sight.
I also recall Whitney Webb having her donated Patreon money simply frozen and stolen for work she did on ANOTHER WEBSITE than the one that was frozen.
And her work was completely factual. She asked them to provide one instance of falsehood, and they could not. But it was deemed "anti-vax", and thus, Patreon swooped in...and took her cash.
The major media did a very slanted take on WSB and the meme stock phenomenon. One of the dynamics that was underappreciated was the desire to "punish" the big short selling hedge funds that had been rigging the markets for years. Bidding up stocks regardless of their fundamentals created some very painful short squeezes.
Basically, the "big boys" objected to "amateurs " disrupting their game, not fully understanding that,for many, disrupting the game was the point.
FWIW this morning Feb 10 my credit card company reported that I had received a refund from GFM.
Not sure if you allow bad language on your blog, Peter, but may I say that I hope the truckers sue these fuckers out of existence.
I do ask that comments be civil and respectful--no flame wars in the threads, please!--but beyond that, it's all good!
The Freedom Convoy would have an uphill battle to launch a lawsuit against GoFundMe. Their terms of service include a binding arbitration clause that could be hard to circumvent.
Donors who don't get a refund promptly should notify their state attorney general. With several states already investigating GoFundMe for possible fraud and deceptive practices, this is likely to end up as a criminal rather than civil litigation.
But beyond that, alternatives such as Give Send Go are getting a huge boost in publicity and credibility. GoFundMe might not get sued out of existence, but a loss of new fundraising business could prove just as lethal.
Givesendgo has terms of service prohibiting unlawful activity, so I imagine they could rescind the fundraiser also if they chose to. In a quick search I wasn't able to find who owns Givesendgo. It's incorporated in Delaware where, to my knowledge, ownership information is available only for a fee. None of which prevented me from donating to the effort, but I would be happier if I could send funds directly to Tamara Lich.
I wonder whether whoever leaned on Gofundme will also be able to effectively lean on Givesendgo.
As a practical matter any entity wanting to facilitate fundraising is going to reserve the right to distance themselves from a particular fundraiser if they so desire. It would be a foolish business decision not to have that cutout just as a means of self preservation.
Which is why the hue and cry over such acts as freezing the Kyle Rittenhouse fundraiser was fairly muted--GoFundMe showed an outrageous double standard but it was still their choice to make and they didn't monkey with the funds.
This time they tried to take the money away from the donors. Punishing the innocent third party doesn't sit well even with most outwardly liberal types. You have to be rabidly ideological to be okay with that behavior, and on both sides of the political spectrum most individuals are not rabidly ideological.
Excellent summary, Peter.
sort of related: This reminds me a little bit of the Robinhood/Wall Street Bets Redditor kerfuffle. Just stop the trading to protect the powerful. Rig the game in plain sight.
I also recall Whitney Webb having her donated Patreon money simply frozen and stolen for work she did on ANOTHER WEBSITE than the one that was frozen.
And her work was completely factual. She asked them to provide one instance of falsehood, and they could not. But it was deemed "anti-vax", and thus, Patreon swooped in...and took her cash.
The major media did a very slanted take on WSB and the meme stock phenomenon. One of the dynamics that was underappreciated was the desire to "punish" the big short selling hedge funds that had been rigging the markets for years. Bidding up stocks regardless of their fundamentals created some very painful short squeezes.
Basically, the "big boys" objected to "amateurs " disrupting their game, not fully understanding that,for many, disrupting the game was the point.