Replies

1. 
   MBerger | May 09, 2007 07:55pm | #1

   I had a few ideas during lunch that might be worth talking about: What if people virtually donated their old tools. And then Knots participants could divvy them up to needy woodworkers based on some selection process?

   We could create a new folder in the Classifieds forum that managed all the related posts: one for donations, and one for applications. Then we could use the polling feature to pick winners.

   The only associated costs i can think of would go to shipping the tools, but I'm sure we can collectively come up with a way to cover that.

   Matt Berger
   Fine Woodworking 

    

1. 
   CharlieStanford | May 09, 2007 08:42pm | #2

   I have two saws - a Pax rip and crosscut in absolutely pristine condition that I will donate. 

   I can probably come up with a few other items as well.

   Contact North Bennett Street School.  I think they probably know some people who could use the help.

   Edited 5/9/2007 1:45 pm ET by ThePosterFormerlyKnownAs

2. 
   Joe Sullivan | May 10, 2007 06:50pm | #3

   Matt:

   You'd have to do it right to avoid tax complications, but a simple non-profit corporation could be set up with a bank account and a paypal account linked from this web site so that people could conveninetly donate as few or as many dollars as they chose (if, like me they DON'T have tools to spare).  We did this on another site where I am a moderator (completely unrelated to woodworking).  The whole thing, including the non-profit, cost us very little to set up and get running.

   We had a suggested donation of $15, but did not set absolute rules.  Many people exceeded the minimum, some who could not sent smaller amounts.  I sent you the URL by private email.  You can see how it works if you look on the main forum there for the Donate thread.

   We offer recognition to donors on the forum, but do not tell or indicate the amount.  A donor is a donor.

   Simple, easy, effective.

   Joe

1. 
   MBerger | May 10, 2007 08:16pm | #5

   Thanks Joe. I'm going to do some homework to see how we can do this properly. I'll keep everyone posted.

    

1. 
   Joe Sullivan | May 10, 2007 09:34pm | #6

   Matt:

   It would be slightly more work, but if you wanted to use the polling process in a way fair to donors, you could set up a sub-forum that restricted access to those who have donated either tools or funds in the last 12 months.  Every quarter or six months, you could post what was available in tools and funds, and the various applicants and have a rules-based selection process probably involving a preliminary round and then a forced ranking of finalists.

   Could be fun.

   Joe

1. 
   CharlieStanford | May 10, 2007 09:57pm | #7

   To keep this pure, and on second thought, I would probably limit this exercise to cash only stipends and cash only donations.  Perhaps gift certificates to suppliers would also work in lieu of the stipends.  But at any rate, I think accepting only donations of cash would make this much easier on the FW staff.  Let's not take their mind's off the magazine.

   Donating actual tools will end up being a nightmare, not to mention what will happen when somebody notices something being put up on EBay for auction after it has been donated and disbursed.

2. 
   woodman2263 | May 10, 2007 10:35pm | #8

   Matt,

   I agree that there should be some kind of special recognition for those of us who donate.  Maybe if someone donates enough money they get a free issue or subscription or something.  Better yet, I'll bet people (donators) would be very proud to see their name on FWW for donating.  Most of us are not going to ever be there for our wwing skills, but maybe for donating we will.  Just a thought.

   Jeff

3. 
   CharlieStanford | May 10, 2007 10:53pm | #9

   We don't need no stinking recognition or any quid pro quo mag subscriptions, etc.

   All this does is take the focus off the task at hand - getting funds/tools in the hands of artists who can't afford them.  Finding and screening the people who will receive the help will be a big enough job without worrying in what form the back patting will be.

    

4. 
   woodman2263 | May 10, 2007 11:10pm | #11

   Sorry, it was just a thought.

5. 
   Joe Sullivan | May 11, 2007 12:22am | #12

   There is nothing wrong with your idea. 

   Actually, I speak from quite a bit of experience with non-profits when I say that there MUST be some sort of recognition (currently serve as a trustee of charitable foundation in Kansas and a research library in Texas, and have been on 4 other non-profit boards over time).  However, given the wide range of disposable income among knots folks, it would be better to keep it non-specific (unless someone wants to donate endowment-sized sums).  A simple "honor role" of donors on a running 12 month basis might do.  At most, a two or three category list with clever names for donor levels might help the process.

   When you see other organizations providing publications as a benefit to donors, the organizations in question are usually non-profits themselves, and they live off the donations.  The publications in those cases are just inducements to donate, and means to make the donors feel connected and involved. 

   On the other hand, FWW is a for-profit enterprise.  It would not make much sense for them to give free subscriptions in exchange for donations.  That would, in effect, make them the largest donor.  They might choose to do that, but no reasonable person could expect them to do so.  It might also fall afoul of IRS regulations, and even of their audited circulation numbers.

   Cheers!

   Joe

6. 
   CharlieStanford | May 11, 2007 01:48pm | #13

   Actually Joe is right.  Most people won't donate significant amounts of money without recognition.  Some people even need it when they cough up a few hundred bucks.

   I guess whatever it takes is whatever it takes.

3. 
   AzDiscDog | May 10, 2007 07:30pm | #4

   I'll (try to) add to that list. I will probably be coming across a wide variety of tools in the near future, many of which I won't be able to use. Makes more sense to put them in the hands of someone who will use them.If you setup that piece in the classifieds, please let me know!Glen

4. 
   KzooRichie | May 10, 2007 11:01pm | #10

   Here is a thought: What about getting donations to schools? The goal would be to help those who are trying to help youngsters learn a lifelong appreciation of the craft. Also, it would give people the opportunity to donate time as well as money.

   In the interest of full disclosure I work at a school.

5. 
   Hastings | May 11, 2007 03:51pm | #14

   Greetings:Giving and receiving are a little more complicated than they first appear.You might be interested in this link:http://virgil.azwestern.edu/~dag/lol/GiveReceive.htmlAnd here are a couple of excerpts:"Typically people prefer a fair "give and take" in their relationships. Thus, if someone helps you too much, you may feel indebted to that person. Such a feeling of indebtedness is clearly uncomfortable. Benefits received are acceptable, only if they can be repaid. Beyond that point, giving can promote hatred instead of gratitude.""To sum it up, although it may be godly to give, it is often uncomfortable to receive. The degree of discomfort depends on the recipient's ability to reciprocate, the "strings attached" to the aid, how much aid is needed, and the recipient's background, gender, and personality. However, offering help in an emergency is unlikely to trigger any resentment. Usually the help offered in the normal "give and take" of everyday life causes the most problems."Hastings

1. 
   Joe Sullivan | May 11, 2007 04:30pm | #15

   Hastings:

   Very good points.  Of course, seni-anonymous donating like what is being discussed helps somewhat, because it is not an individual giving to another individual with all that implies.  In our Rotary Club, we have a $1 million plus charitable trust that makes grants to worthy causes, and also, in the same trust, but segregated for accounting purposes we have a couple of substantial donor-specified funds that make grants from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars to people with urgent needs.  In one of those cases, the donors (a couple) are still alive and well, but wanted that detachment precisely so that the recipients would not feel awkward and obligated. I suspect that the concept we are batting around here would work that way, too.

   Poster formerly known...

   Actually, a gift of much less than a few hundred dollars can be very significant to the donor.  We can't know that from behind the screen.  The "widow who gives from her mite" deserves more merit than the rich man who gives of his abundance.  My suggestion is that IF FWW even wants to fool with this, that they keep the minimums low and do not reveal details of donations, except in the broadest of categories.

   Cheers!

   Joe

1. 
   SCMedLion | May 11, 2007 05:14pm | #16

   Wow!  I'm excited to see this suggestion still lives.  Like other young amateurs I don't yet have excess tools to give but would consider donating funds now and then if the program gets up and running.

2. 
   pmmatty | May 12, 2007 04:49am | #17

   It's nice to have a discussion about the positive thought of how to donate the tools we don't use to those who can use them.  It takes some of the bad taste out of my mouth which resulted from the recent thread in which many of the posters had a problem with the recipient of the free shop tools.  I'm still shaking my head at that one.

   I'm glad you decided not to jump, Matt.

   PMM

1. 
   colebearanimals | May 12, 2007 04:55am | #18

   I would give .

                    Paul