Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Hotmail Domain Reward Check on E*Bay
Big_Joe wrote to us with the continuing story of Michael Chaney. Michael is the guy who paid the re-registration fee for the Hotmail domain name, after Microsoft had failed to over the Christmas holiday. He's auctioning the 500$ "thank you" check off on E*Bay and has pledged to donate the winning bid to charity, as well as matching up to $2,000 of that out of his own pocket.
Let's graph how much Microsoft has donated to charity and political organizations versus time in relation to the trial.
Au contraire -- without the media attention, do you really think he'd have received anything at all? At best, the $35 he spent? The reason this can be auctioned off on ebay AT ALL is because it's somewhat notorious, it's a 'relic' in a sense.
Without public awareness of this incident, it would be a $35 transaction; it's the hype around it that makes MS's check for $500 worth many times that.
--
In this age of insanely record-breaking IPO's, this story seems to me a perfect object lesson of how excessive press can artificially inflate the general perception of a thing's value by two orders of magnitude or more in a very short time -- from $35, to $500, to $2500+, in just a couple of weeks.
Not sure if this is a good or bad thing, but it is certainly an interesting thing to watch....
--
Chaney is playing a pretty canny game here; he's certainly "profiting" in terms of publicity, and the fact that the amounts are to be donated to charity means nobody can sting him on being greedy for money.
I think it's extremely clever of him to auction off the cheque, as this permits us to get a picture of how much the "rest of the world" considers the matter to be valued at. This is most certainly an economically efficient outcome, as it can't but provide a valuation of at least $500.
And it shows us how insane peoples' valuations of the matter are; if it sorts out at $5000, this shows that someone considers that having a cheque for $500 from Microsoft is worth $5000.
Of course, what he should have done is to start a company whose sole asset is the cheque, and do an IPO.
Betcha he'd be a billionaire by now!
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
$35 for a domain name
and 2750+2500= $5250.00 for charity!
It keeps on going, and going, and going!
I hate to be the one to break this to you, Sig, but right now, you're at (Score:1, Funny)... hmm, maybe Rob wasn't kidding...
Moderators seem to have misplaced their brains recently. Either that, or there's a lot of moderators who systematically skip (through whatever means) anonymous coward postings. This kind person posted a link to the actual auction within five minutes of the article being posted on /. cuz Hemos forgot it. No big deal, but the very next post is rated +5 for giving the exact same link. Granted they were less than a minute apart, but this one IS first. Yeah, this is offtopic and possibly redundant, but the message I'm referring to is undeniably non redundant. Please, moderators, check and make sure that the description you're selecting actually fits before you submit it.
It really disgusts me too when Slashdot posts a link to a poll about OS's that doesn't have Linux in first place.
Then of course, all of the Linux lemmings go and 'stuff' the poll to "make sure" Linux is #1.
That really disgusts me too. What about you?
So, let me get this right. Somebody is going to pay Chaney x dollars, where x >= 5000. Chaney is going to donate x + 2500 to a charity. Chaney deducts at least 7500 from his taxable income. Depending on his bracket, this guy could make out quite well.
Cool.
Had I thought of it (as if) I would have done it simply as a cute trick, or simply to see if it worked (hacker ethic?). After that, I'd just be trying to ride the publicity wave for as long as possible, while promoting things I care about (SETI & Bluetooth for me - Linux & Nashville's Table for him).
Seriously, you can't believe that exposure doesn't lead to sales (and lack of exposure results in fewer sales). Just look at Coke.
The loss is probably a large absolute amount (relative to a normal company), a small percentage (relative to the MS empire), but certainly is non-zero.
Are you a registered non-profit organization? This isn't a "let's throw a few $$$'s around just for the fun of it." You have to get that tax benefit.
-BrentMaybe he's doing this in response to the people saying he was doing it for monetary gain, just to prove them wrong. What he's doing now doesn't indicate what was going through his mind in the past. Secondly, maybe he was doing it all along to grab his own 15 minutes of fame. His latest efforts could be evidence of that, if he thinks $2000 is worth the new round of publicity that he'll get for this. I'm not knocking the guy or anyone else who's donating to charity, but again, what he's doing now doesn't prove anything about his original intent.
On another note, a shady "charity" has a good opportunity to get themselves a quickie 2000 bucks: ZicoCare Charities, Inc. outbids everyone else for the check and names ZicoCare Charities, Inc. as the targeted charity, thereby getting back the money they put in, plus Mr. Chaney's $2000 in matching funds. Oh well, food for thought.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
- Insertion fee for an item with an starting price over $50: $2.00
- Final Value Fee:
- 5% of the price up to $25: $1.25
- 2.5% of the amount between $25.01-$1000: $24.37
- 1.25% of the amount over $1000: $32.18 so far
This is based on the current high bid of $3575If the auction ended now, the total fees would be $59.80
========
<sig>Guvf vf abg n frperg zrffntr
Umm.. what else *could* he have done?
He can't steal or otherwise mess with it, or he'd be a meatwaffle in court.
He could just do nothing.. and. well.. do nothing..
or he can pay it, and get is 10 minutes of fame.
I believe that once your Karma reaches 25, you should be able to give one point to people, indicating that you believe they're worth listening to. However, if they start to suck, it would be nice to be able to take it back...
:)
Well, the idea of bestowing karma gifts on others is interesting and might work, but I don't think you should be able to take it back. That could lead to all sorts of bad situations... blackmail being the first that comes to mind. (Yah, I know, it's just Slashdot, but hey, if it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.) Gifts should be gifts. No "Indian givers", please.
Besides, moderators should take care of any one who get gifts and turns out to be a looser. Same as they do now.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Seems like he's just buying another 15 minutes of fame to me.
Or perhaps he was planning on making a significant donation already, and decided to make it more of an event?
People have certainly spend far more than $2500 on far less worthy causes.
Tis interesting to see... especially in light of your recent 'attitude' - whether that's changed or just been a onfirmation, I don't know... but you certainly suck up moderation :P (as in vacuum-like)
Open Source. Closed Minds. We are Slashdot.
He got up out of the bath, and decided he needed compensation. So he decided that he was going to 'donate' the money to his own bank account, never a charity to see it.
He was promptly charged with Dishonestly Obtaining Financial Advantage By Deception.
Open Source. Closed Minds. We are Slashdot.
It's not absolute value that matters, it's the percentage of net worth.
100 billion net worth for Gates, donate 5 billion = 5%.
50000 net worth for this guy, donate 5k = 10%.
Also, doesn't Gates donations really go to a charity that is a thinly-disguised Microsoft promotion machine?
Interesting idea. Nice one.
:) - now if I haven't been moderated up once in the interim?
The main modification I'd make, though, would be to make Karma degrade over time. I'm on 30ish right now (which is nothing spectacular in the grand scheme of things) so it'd take quite a bit of trolling for me to lose my +1 bonus. That isn't right.
The point is, people change. Why should I be rewarded in two years time for making good posts - in the opinions of some moderators
It'd also be interesting to see auto +1's appearing in meta moderation to se if we could lost Karma that way...
Greg
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
And how much would the tax be?
/. interview :)
I fully agree on your 2nd comment though. Maybe Hemos can ask him to do next weeks
----------------------------------------------
the pun is mightier than the sword
No, because MS never lost ownership of the domain. MS didn't actually have to pay this guy anything, but it would have been rather bad PR not to.
--
This space unintentionally left unblank.
Through proxy bidding, early bidders can lock in higher bids even if the net difference is less than the minimum bid increment. It's complicated, but it can help you win auctions by a few cents in a pinch. :)
For more information, click here.
This story just makes me smile.
He saw something that needed to be done, something he could help with, and he just went ahead and did it. He helped out MS, even though we all hate them. (joke, geez!) He's been civil about the whole thing. And he's raising a big chunk of change -- which he'll give to charity.
He sounds like a cool guy.
Cara Hart chart@eNOSPAMfurn.com Systems Administrator eFurn.com, LLC. and ARITEK Systems, Inc.
Is there any good reason "17 percent of the population of Nashville can be labeled hungry"? And what does that mean, exactly?
If it takes charity to feed 17% of a city, something is seriously fucked up, and handouts will never fix the problem.
Teach a man to fish, and all...
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
None of these statements are necissarily true:
"Giving money to charity" = "a great man"
"Giving money to charity" = "a good man"
"Giving money to charity" = "the right thing to do"
The first two are never true. The last one is true only in some situations. Was he participating in this charity before Microsoft sent him a $500 check? Did he just bow to pressure from "the community" and give it all -- plus 4 times more -- to charity to gain approval somehow? Was this an opportunity to help along something he was already involved in?
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Sorry once I made and association of names I had to share. Instead of cause causing trouble for society as a whole like Markov, Micheal causes PR trouble for Microsoft thereby benefiting society.
No Smoking
No Spitting
-The MGMT
Banfield
Why would you want a check that you can't cash anyway?
You mean I just spent $2300 on a $500 check that I can't cash? Damn it!
I think the point here is the charity...the check itself is a novel excuse to give to a good cause.
"Nobody owns the fucking words man." - James Dean
"If the money were going to go to Microsoft in some way, do you doubt in the slightest way that there wouldn't be 9 million such Linux-zealot trolls making every version of Windows-Sucks up for a username posting fake bids?"
I should hope not. While there is the odd zealot, the Linux community has grown up over the last year or so in terms of their dealings with the outside world.
I don't see how you can draw a parrellel to Linux and Microsoft about the money going somewhere, though, as it'd go to either the charity Mike chose, or a charity the highest bidder chose -- not Linux or a distribution maker. And if it did go to MS -- why? They're a big company, and they are very profitable. Why would they need money?
---
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
And I don't begrudge him the opportunity to donate the proceeds to whatever charity he wants. If he wants suggestions from us, he can ask. He can make a political statement, try to right something that is wrong with the world or whatever. The bottom line on this is that by offering up 4 times what Micros~1 gave him for saving them major bucks, he makes them look awfully petty by comparison. Regardless of where the money goes, he's made his political statement already.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
He would not have to make them transferrable, hell just auction off your handle/password loaded with karma and start another!
www.mp3.com/Undocumented
He needed to check his hotmail account (according to the article I read). Yes, hotmail sucks. It's slow (unless you use Outlook), the filters are mostly useless, and the accounts are inundated by AOL-level amounts of spam. But many people sign up for the account when they first begin to use the internet, and don't want the trouble of migrating even after they acquire cluefullness.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
That's a bit unfair. Microsoft's donations policy has been around long before the trial began. Yell "evil" all you like, but the truth is that Microsoft is probably one of the best companies around....and they successful cause of their "lifestyle" and "work" ethics.
However, Microsoft do only match donations of their employees up to $10000 a year.
They ofcourse make other donations..and then there's bill's personal donations.
Well it is pretty cool that the guy is donating the money to charity but don't you get the feeling that he thinks he has stumbled into the stunt of tryng to generate PR for himself?
If you review the links in one of the subthreads, you will find that he did make several comments. The one I remembered was, "I would ask that when they make out a check they consider how much revenue would have otherwise been lost had this been down for another day or two...". The articles that were linked had a bit more context that make him seem less greedy.
I'm not trying to make any unwarranted accusations. Frankly, I was hoping some ideas would be posted on verifying legitimacy. You have the benefit of knowing him. All I know is that he's some guy who has managed to keep his name in the press far longer than I would have expected, and that makes me suspicious of his motives.
If he's doing this all for charity, then more power to him. You have to admit that it's not exactly unknown for flakes to capitalize on a windfall of publicity.
---
Seriously, you can't believe that exposure doesn't lead to sales (and lack of exposure results in fewer sales). Just look at Coke.
When Coke advertises, they try and create a "lifestyle" around the product, so that when you see it in the supermarket or whatever, you identify with the product enough to buy it (note that Coke traditionally has not advertised on taste).
But what exposure does Linux gain from this? The average person is going to focus on the humorous fact that a normal individual paid the bill for giant Microsoft -- but The Advocacy is attuned to any news regarding Linux, so naturally you focus on that fact. There is zero positive press for Linux out of this.
Note, by the way, that the average person sees this as humorous, and does not carry any anger like The Advocacy would like.
If the story read (to use your example), "Michael, sipping on a Coke, described how he paid the bill for Microsoft", would you say that Coke would get a slew of new business? "Maude, that there Michael guy is a good joe! If he's a Coke drinker, then by God I'm gonna drink Coke, too!"
Maybe if the story was something like, "Michael used his Linux operating system to repair the Microsoft mail system" or something, there might be some slight tie-in, but the merits of Linux had nothing to do with the story.
---
I suppose some people might move from Hotmail over this, but it wasn't down long enough to really affect much. No one uses a free e-mail to get 100% uptime, and I even doubt it was down long enough to bounce received messages.
As for ads, unless they are at 100% ad space utilization (unlikely), the ads are simply made up at another time.
Finally, Linux got zero new users over this. People change platforms when there is a good reason (like some superior application), not when a particular advocate happens to pay a bill.
---
Perhaps non-binding is not even the issue, but it's not easily verifiable. Why would he only want cashier's checks and not personal checks? All he has to do is wait for the check to clear.
---
Your analysis is wrong, because he would be required to report the amount of the sale as income. The amount he donates to charity from the sale would exactly offset the amount, so the net effect on his taxes would be only the $2500 he contributes. All that happens is his $2500 is offset by 30% (or whatever). There's no way he'll come out ahead on this (ignoring the value of the publicity).
Not that I like either, just schadenfreude, my desire to see no good deed go unpunished. I think I've watched too much Simpson's.
I would frame the check and keep it so I could tell my grandchildren about "the evil empire". This is of course after we figure out how to clone penguins and then genetically engineer them to destroy Microsoft. After that, we'll auction off the penguins and use the money to buy Redmond, then we'll put up a huge penguin shaped building and...sorry, I was going off on a tangent there. Seriously though, I would really hope that he donates it to either FSF or Debian.
Munky_v2
Jay
Seems to me like he is buying fame, but anyone who complains about someone giving 2 grand away to a charity for purposes of achieving another few minutes in the spotlight isn't gauging the situation properly. He deserves a lot more praise than, say, a large corporation that shells out advertising bucks to hype a product that squashes a consumer market and fails to deliver on 95% (arbitrary number, yes?) of it's promises. I think everyone should buy a little fame this way. This man is an example to be emulated.
Network Security: It always comes down to a big guy with a gun.
OK, following this wonderful logic of yours:
Bill Gates donated a great load of money to charity as well. I think it says great things about how generous Microsoft must be. Bollocks
The actions of one man cannot represent the actions of a community. The Linux community in particular are in general (with some exceptions) a group of Microsoft bashing self-righteous 'gurus' - something that this man, who is auctioning the check is clearing not.
He represents himself, he does not represent the Linux community by any stretch of the imagination.
Wow, thanks to the slugish stupidity of the mega-corporation, a minor-star is born. It just goes to show that computer knowledge + oppertunism = your name in the (electronic) papers.
Feminism is the wild notion that women are human beings.
This guy is raising money for a charity and he is a hero. I agree with this.
But Bill Gates gives billions of dollars to charity and it is a conspiracy/Bill Gates Sucks/Microsoft Sucks/etc etc..
Is there a bit of Hypocrisy in the slashdot crowd?
(IANAL, but...) Microsoft wasn't close to losing this domain name, but in general it would probably fall under the rules for abandoned property.
A trademark is *not* an absolute IP right, it has to be defended. That's why they send out "cease and dissent" orders for trivial infringements, like the "Dummy's Guide to my roommate's most annoying habits." If the IP owner doesn't defend their rights, they become unenforceable.
A domain name can be defended by trademarks, of course, but the flip side is that a domain name is the most trivial thing to defend - the cost of an annual renewal is far less than the cost of consulting with your lawyer for an hour. If a company not only didn't pay the fee while the domain was "on hold," but actually let it slip entirely, a judge is unlikely to feel that they exercised due diligence in defending their IP property. It depends on how tightly the domain is tied to the company, of course, but I would not be surprised if domains with only loose connections ("passport" = Microsoft?) be declared legally abandoned and open to whoever paid the bill.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
This guy has a lot of integrity or, at the very least, is one hell of a showman. What would truly be funny is if he donated the money to OSS.
----
----
Am I the only one who thinks Microsoft is a misnomer? Perhaps Macrosoft would be a better fit?
Alright. I have read dozens of posts saying how this shows how great the linux community is. Personally, I think that is a load of crap. I have been a part of the community for about a year and a half, I have submitted hacks to kernel.org and have helped new people. But, I think this man paying for a companies mistake, then giving the money (along with 2500 dollars) away only shows how great this man is, not how great the linux community? Granted 3000 (or however much it totals) is a fair sum, it isn't like it will create a new charity, it isn't a rather outrageous donation. Its just an interesting happening, and this man seems to be very nice, but what did the Linux community? If a man is part of a car club, and that man helps an elderly women cross the street, it reflects the man, not the freaking car club. Same goes for linux. THe community is just trying to take credit. The linux community does many good things as a whole, BUT THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM.
"Lazyness is the first step towards efficiency." -Patrick Bennett
"linuxsux (0) "
With the requisite shades. And, suprisingly, seems to have a high bid (might be a welcher).
But who would sink to this level? This is going to a charity, be it one to feed the homeless, one to help children, or one to help people being stepped on big corporations. Why should some troll be allowed to stomp all over this good will?
Using this for free adversiting or free trolling over Linux users (raising the bid price unfairly, too)..
It really says a lot about a person's moral fibre, that. It also really disgusts me.
---
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
At one company I used to work for the managers would always complain that their expense credit cards would keep bouncing becuase accounting would put of paying poulty sums for months, aparently we nearly had the phone line cut of a couple of times.
I have heard suggesting that this kind of thing is common accros lots of companys, I wonder how many valuable domains will be lost over the next few years attributable to sloth from the bean counters. This guy proberbly done the right thing in using the whole thing to get quite a bit of publicity for himself, I however might have been tempted to nab the url for myself after it had been 'reposesed'.
People talk about the value of generic domain names before they have been used, but what of the value of a domain name like hotmail after it has become so popular. Makes you wonder how much Microsoft would have been prepaired to pay to get it back. I know there are rules against domain sitting that allow a company to claim a domain name they have a trademark in relation to, but would this stand up in court if the name had been lost due to non payment?
I think that he has been unfairly ripped on slashdot because he was hoping for some money. As far as I'm concerned, I wish he did get some money out of this.
Now he has gone the other route and will be donating money to charity. Good for him. I think it says great things about the Linux community.
That which does not kill me only makes me whinier
I don't think I've heard about someone with such a sense of civic responsibility in a long time. Imagine - you're sitting at home/work trying to read your hotmail and it isn't working. Do you sit there on your @$$ and bitch about microsoft and the evil empire and how you can't rely on anything anymore...NO, you find out what the problem is and go and fix it, and I'm not talking about just flicking some switch here to re-activate hotmail so you and others can read their mail, you fork out cold hard cash (or was that plastic?) without any certainty that you will see that money again. Then a week or so later you get a cheque form some corporate fat-cats who's @$$ you saved by shelling out your money. Looks like the fat-cats didn't have any loose change because they've made out the check for $500! Do you sit there and think to yourself - "Sweet, looks like a nice new something for me", or "gee, now I can pay off all those parking fines." NO, you offer to auction the cheque off to charity, and then offer to cough up another $2,500 or so for said charity. Makes me feel kind of ashamed of myself, how about you?
Actually, since the bidding has passed 500 dollars, in fact it has reached $2,325.00 as of now, the proceeds will go to the highest bidders charity of choice, with matching funds(or $2500.00 if it goes above that) from Mr. Chaney himself. He is also trying to get Microsoft to provide matching funds too, or at least the original amount of 500.
First, here is a link to the charity the proceeds are going to, per the ebay item description: http://nashville.citysearch.com/E/V/NASTN/0002/13/ 67/cs1.html Second, note that the current bid price is $2,100, versus the $500 bid at the time the Slashdot story was originally posted. Egads. The Slashdot effect on eBay auctions? I can just see the call now for Malda to make karma points transferrable. It would be the next eBay craze - karma auctions.
According to this story in Wired News, ICANN is now letting registrars take 10-year renewals. Since $350 is just as much a drop in the bucket to a big corp as $35, I'm sure every one will take them up on it. The result will be far fewer cracks like this for some random stranger to fill.
One of the open source funds should bid like $10,000 for the check and then have him donate the money back to the fund. Then they'd have the check, and $2,000 more!
But seriously--what a cool guy--
/will
Seeing as people are paying thousands of dollars for a $500 check, I thought I'd take this opportunity to offer for sale not one, but two (!) checks from Microsoft to me. Check one is a $20 rebate check for Microsoft Encarta, and check two is a $100 rebate check for a Xircom 56K modem.
Bidding starts at $120, so lets see those offers fly! Papa needs a new pair of shoes!
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
ZDNet bids item with pro-linux description
Posted by Roblimo on 04:15 AM April 1st, 2000
ZDNet Employee writes "ZDNet's CEO is auctioning his old Porche for a new Ferrari. The good thing is that the Porche comes with a Redhat 5.1 CD in the back on the trunk. All proceeds go to the CEO and his girlfriend." It's worth $11,342,251 as we speak. Can I bid with my inflated Andover/RedHat stocks?
If the bid's $2500 he'll pay out his max. $2500 for a total charitable contribution of $5000 which in a 30% tax bracket would be worth $1500 as a tax deduction, giving him an out of pocket cost of $1000.
If the bid went as high as $6000, then the contribution would be $8500 - worth *over* $2500 as a deduction, and he'd actually be ahead!
Anyway, just pointing this out for fun. The charity wins whatever the amount, so it's definitely a cool thing to do.
...but this guy has decided to give the money to people who really need it: Nashville's Table, a soup kitchen operation of sorts.
From the link on EBay:
Nashville's Table, formed in '89 largely through the efforts of Phil Bredesen, a healthcare executive who later was elected mayor of Nashville, collects excess prepared and perishable foods from groceries, restaurants, and caterers and distributes it to agencies that serve hungry, needy, and homeless people. Since then, Nashville's Table has collected and distributed more than 2 million pounds of food--at no cost to either the donors or the recipient agencies. Nashville's Table relies on funding by donations from individuals, corporations, churches, and foundations. Currently, Nashville's Table works with about 175 donor groceries and restaurants, but the addition of two trucks to its fleet doubled its capacity. The not-for-profit organization says that 17 percent of the population of Nashville can be labeled hungry or threatened by hunger, while 20 percent of all prepared and perishable food in Nashville ultimately gest wasted.--Bill Hobbs
"Nobody owns the fucking words man." - James Dean
We have no guarantees that this is really going to go to charity, and as far as I know, his promise is non-binding (real lawyers correct me if I'm wrong).
The reason I'm suspicious is his original quotes saying that he felt he deserved a large sum of money from Microsoft, based how much theoretical money was "lost" (which, of course, was really zero).
Call me cynical, but based on his past behavior I think a grain of salt is prescribed here.
---
You should have capitalized the N in Nazis.
kwsNI
http://cgi.ebay.co m/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=239850613
Gentlemen (and women) start your bidding.
--
Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
Why?
I mean, I see your point, he's just doing this for good press (I'm not agreeing, just seeing). But honestly, if you can get someone to do a good deed just for some (free) good press, thats great! More good deeds will happen, and the world will be a better place.
Why does a good deed become bad just because it will get you covered in the media? This guy is giving $2500 of his own money to charity not to mention spending some of his time to raise yet more money for charity. HE'S USING HIS GOOD PRESS TO RAISE MONEY FOR CHARITY! I think it is in remarkably poor taste to critize someone who is doing their best to get as much money as possible to a food bank. Sure, he gets his name in print, but in 3 weeks who will remember it? By your logic, Mother Theresa was extremly petty. I mean, her whole life she just kept trying to make headlines by helping people.
In short, I have a greal of respect for this man for donating his time and money to charity and very litte for you for critisizing him.
--Nick