Charity Refuses Donation Because of D&D Connection

An anonymous reader writes "This year's GenCon Charity Auction raised over $17,000 which they intended to donate to Gary Gygax's favorite charity, Christian Children's Fund. However, the charity refused the donation when they learned of its connection to Dungeons & Dragons." It seems to me all they would need to do is cast remove curse or dispel evil and the money would be fine to use.

Comments

Advanced Bad & Summary

[RobertB-DC]

In their rush to paint Christians as idiots, the editors failed to notice this addendum to TFA:

Christian Children's Fund made the decision to decline the gift from Gen Con, LLC as the request presented to us gave the appearance that CCF (the organization) was an endorser or supporter of a gaming convention, which CCF was not. As many non-profit organizations, CCF is selective in its endorsements or support in order to maintain the integrity of its name and logo. We cannot lend our name to an event for which we have no involvement. This decision should in no way be interpreted as CCF holding an opinion on Mr. Gygax, gaming enthusiasts or the game Dungeons and Dragons.

Some of my fellow faith-mates do make the rest of us look pretty silly. But the non-religious folks apparently have a knee-jerk reaction that would make Dr. Dobson proud.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Jonah Hex]

I am so glad that they have a reasonable reason for doing this. I was a victim of my grandmother taking away my AD&D books back in the 90's due to the 700 Club helpfully telling her they would allow me to summon a demon from hell or force me to kill myself when my alternate persona died.
 
Jonah HEX

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[JoshuaZ]

It might at first glance seem like a reasonable explanation but it doesn't hold water. They have had no problem in the past accepting money from businesses or events.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[ratboy666]

CCF is not a sponsor. They are the sponsored charity. No endorsement from CCF was needed. Well... a simple "thank you" would have sufficed.

*They* decided to turn down the gift, which CAN be interpreted as having such an opinion.

So CCF had to back-pedal, and release an announcement about how to interpret the decision. Meh. Too late, the dunderheads have spoken very loudly with their actions.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Hush you zealot! Your fundamentalist ramblings aren't welcome here; for this is Slashdot bastion of reason and impartiality.

To arms!

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[GooberToo]

Christian Children's Fund made the decision to decline the gift from Gen Con, LLC as the request presented to us gave the appearance that CCF (the organization) was an endorser or supporter of a gaming convention, which CCF was not.

Therefore, anyone they do accept money from, they are endorsing. Interesting. Sure makes you wanna know who's been donating.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you now have a set of dice lovingly carved from her bones?

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Rycross]

Well, the difference here is that they feel that the donation implies their endorsement, while other donations might carry no such implication. Its perfectly valid for a charity to be careful about what they appear to endorse. They've explicitly stated that it has nothing to do with D&D, so why not take their words at face value? Whats the harm? That we can't get worked up into an "OMG Christians!" fervor?

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Rycross]

No, this particular donation appeared to imply an endorsement. They're in no way saying that every donation received implies an endorsement. Why they feel that way is probably related to the detail of how the funds were raised and donated (as in, I'm not a lawyer so I wouldn't know).

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Inner_Child]

You should really check out some of the Chick religious tracts surrounding gaming and witchcraft. I really don't think I've ever laughed that hard before in my life.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Rycross]

The money doesn't just *poof* disappear because one charity said "No thanks." Last time I checked there is a huge variety of charities that they can donate that money to.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[krgallagher]

"*They* decided to turn down the gift, which CAN be interpreted as having such an opinion."

You know, they are a private charity and are free to any opinion and action they wish as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. People have a bad case of "I want to do what I want and I want you to do what I want" these days. Gen Con, LLC should donate the money to some other worthwhile charity and "Get Over Themselves!"

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[JoshuaZ]

Well, ask yourself why would they be afraid of this particularly appearance of endorsement and not others (especially when they haven't made this claim about other donations). Are they afraid that there would be backlash in the Christian community if they accepted it? If so, we should ask ourselves if that's much better a situation.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be this one.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Grampa?

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Rycross]

The way I read it is that they don't accept donations at all if:

1) it appears to be an endorsement of the organization giving

and

2) if they had no original involvement with the organization or event from which the funds are raised

The issue is that this money was raised at a fundraiser at a certain event which the charity was not involved in. Other donations wouldn't have the same baggage, and thus they'd have no reason to deny them. Unfortunately, charities have to protect their image in order to keep donations coming in.

I'm not saying that they absolutely didn't refuse the funds because of the D&D connection. But they've made a plausible claim that they didn't, and it seems to be sincere. No-one has put forth any other evidence that they'd accept a donation from a similar fund-raising event that wasn't D&D motivated. So, given the lack of information, my view is that the reasonable course of action is to take their word for it and just donate the money elsewhere. Whats the alternative? Attribute ulterior motives without evidence so we can have a good ol' religious bash-fest? Pass.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Rakishi]

Gen Con, LLC should donate the money to some other worthwhile charity and "Get Over Themselves!"

They did, your point was what again?

You know, they are a private charity and are free to any opinion and action they wish as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others.

And others are perfectly free to call them idiots for it. Or does freedom of opinion only go one way?

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Spacejock]

I used to run D&D sessions in lunchtimes at school, back in the 80s. They got more and more popular until a dozen or so of my fellow students would gather in the classroom to get involved in my latest effort. Then the PTA got wind of it, the school banned it, and the kids went back to doing nothing much at all. (To add insult to injury, we were only playing Basic & Expert D&D. I tried to explain it wasn't 'The devil worshipping one' but they weren't buying it.)

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[arthurh3535]

As many non-profit organizations, CCF is selective in its endorsements or support in order to maintain the integrity of its name and logo. We cannot lend our name to an event for which we have no involvement. This decision should in no way be interpreted as CCF holding an opinion on Mr. Gygax, gaming enthusiasts or the game Dungeons and Dragons.

How can you not see this as "D&D is not good" in that context? It is an opinion, straight up that they don't feel it is a good donation... strictly because of the D&D connection. This is nothing more than mealy-mouth speak for "we don't want to look bad for dissing on them."

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[khellendros1984]

And the question wasn't "What's the harm in CCF not taking the money", it was "What's the harm in taking their explanation at face value". Why take their explanation as cover up something more idiotic if their reasons seem to be adequate?

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[aussie_a]

How the fuck was she killing zombies without a DM?

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[HiVizDiver]

You owe me a new monitor + keyboard.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Achromatic1978]

"We thank you for allowing the opportunity to raise money on our behalf", or any number of phrasings in the request could imply endorsement. Why is this such a big issue? Because misrepresenting (and I'm not saying they did at all, but it's something to be aware of from the perspective of the charity) an endorsement from a charity to solicit donations is what some people might refer to as "fraud".

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Strange, because I know plenty of christians who have no problem D&D because they recognize it for what it is, a harmless game. Some of them even play it, and would resent the implication that their hobby is 'dirty".

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Artifakt]

For any non-profit that wishes to preserve 501 status and such under the U S legal code, there are big differences in how to handle money that comes from a private person, another non-profit or a for profit entity. There are also some differences in what has to be done if money was raised by a non-profit organization with an advance agreement, or if it wasn't. This sounds like the convention either advertised that membership would help some money go to the CCF without having an advance agreement, or that there's an issue with whether the convention itself is a non-profit entity, in the full, liscensed, legal sense.
          If the CCF doesn't act this way, they can do more than risk tarnishing their image. They can even lose their legal status as a non-profit. One result of this would be that any retirement funds their employees have set up (403-B's), even if funded all with the employee's own money, aren't legitimate, and all those employees would owe back taxes and penalties and interest on those taxes, for at least the last year, maybe longer. Another result is that the CCF could be sued for back wages 'owed' people who were unpaid volunteers. A third is that they would have to meet equal opportunity hiring guidelines for all those 'employees', and since they probably have no records of having ever given their management staff the necessary guidance as to conducting mandatory nondiscriminatory employee evaluations for those volunteers, they would automatically be guilty under law of discrimination should even a single person bring suit.
      Since it was set up as a non-profit, the CCF has probably not incorporated under the rules of a corp friendly state such as Delaware. They might even face such lawsuits in a state such as New York or California.
      But go ahead, people, make this all about nasty Christians who hate your hobby.
 

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Artifakt]

I've already explained in this thread, the consequences the CCF may have been risking if they took this money. All that depends, of course, on the details of how the convention management organized and publicized the event, which we don't know from the article. There are plenty of cases where a charity has sued over misuse of its name in connection with an unsanctioned event, both to protect its trademarked identity and to distance themselves from any charges that they are party to jointly violating the law regarding charities. The CCF is evidently confident this does not rise to that level, or they feel their reputation as a charity is good enough that they are not at serious risk of being blamed if the convention management has broken the law.
        Given the limited facts in the article, there appears no chance the CCF has broken the law, and some chance that the convention, at least technically, has, although there is no reason to think they intended to derive any profit from their association with the CCF's name, and so most DA's would not want to follow up on it beyond a letter telling them to get their ducks in a row. But go ahead, call them names.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[tlhIngan]

The money doesn't just *poof* disappear because one charity said "No thanks." Last time I checked there is a huge variety of charities that they can donate that money to.

Ah, but the problem is, the people may have donated because they're donating to Gygax's favorite charity. Just because it refused to accept the money doesn't mean that the money can go to another charity.

Even if the CCF name wasn't used, and something like "This donation will go to Gygax's favorite charity", people may be donating under the premise that they're helping Gygax's favorite charity, whatever that may be.

The only option is to refund the money. Even if there's an equivalent charity, some donors may object to that for whatever reason (even if it's "That's not Gygax's charity! I wouldn't have to donated!").

Of course, this is also dependent on whether or not Gen Con recorded the donators and amounts and thus can refund it.

(If you still think "they should just donate it to someone else", what would you do if that "someone else" is PETA? Greenpeace? Red Cross (American or otherwise)? SPCA? Or any one of the many charities that could be even potentially controversial? Like the Discovery Institute?)

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[ShakaUVM]

Because misrepresenting (and I'm not saying they did at all, but it's something to be aware of from the perspective of the charity) an endorsement from a charity to solicit donations is what some people might refer to as "fraud".

Right, and GenCon has had a lot of that going around these days. They lost the right to do the Star Wars Celebration conventions after LucasArts donated a bunch of stuff for a charity auction, and then GenCon kept all the money. (The agreement was that they'd donate the "profits", see, and, boy, running those charity auctions sure are expensive.) Yeah, stealing money from kids with cancer... that's GenCon for ya.

Then you also have the back taxes owed to Indianapolis, and then their bungled bankrupcy (Peter A. called it a "Learning Experience) trying to get out of it.

Skeezy.

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[KGIII]

I take it that they failed the save vs. liquid?

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Drakkenmensch]

My mother sat me down one day when I was very young and spent along time telling me about the movie she saw the night before of kids playing this 'evil game' that leads some of them to kill themselves, and that I must never, EVER play that game. Naturally, I simply HAD to find out what this incredible "Dungeons and Dragons" she warned was all about.

So in short, if my mom hadn't forbidden me to play it, it would have taken me at least another 10-15 years to find out about it. I credit my mother for giving me such an early head start in my roleplaying career!

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[Jonah Hex]

I was rather disappointed that I was modded funny, as I was dead serious. (the bone dice reply was FUNNY) We got in a huge argument about it, and since the religious right had told her that I would say it was just a game while it was really a tool of Satan I didn't make much progress. I had to search around myself to find my AD&D books from where she had hidden them. I'm just glad I got back my tactical rules 3rd edition and the rest!
 
Jonah HEX

Re:Advanced Bad & Summary

[crimson30]

How 'bout this one?

This summary is already out of date

[mothrsuperior]

From the link:
 

Edit: In response to complaints received, people have been receiving the following explanatory letter.

        Christian Childrenâ(TM)s Fund made the decision to decline the gift from Gen Con, LLC as the request presented to us gave the appearance that CCF (the organization) was an endorser or supporter of a gaming convention, which CCF was not. As many non-profit organizations, CCF is selective in its endorsements or support in order to maintain the integrity of its name and logo. We cannot lend our name to an event for which we have no involvement. This decision should in no way be interpreted as CCF holding an opinion on Mr. Gygax, gaming enthusiasts or the game Dungeons and Dragons.

(Emphasis in bold supplied by me.) At first, I was upset because I thought they were rejecting the money because of its association with D&D. I have changed my position. I have worked with charities and in fact many of them (particularly large ones) have very specific rules about events they will sponsor. Many charities will not sponsor any event that they don't manage themselves. There are many reasons for this and very few of them will have anything to do with moral condemnation of the event organizer.

Nothing to see hear, Move along.

Re:This summary is already out of date

[2short]

Right. And they don't want money from GenCon why? GenCon isn't a PAC; there's no legal reason they can't take the money. Which leaves that they don't "wish to be associated with" people giving money in memory of Gary Gygax. Who, we might note, they happily took money from directly when he was alive.

After Reading TFA

[stoolpigeon]

Just to be clear - they did not turn it down because of the D&D connection but because of policies in place about how they filter the funds they take that may make them appear to endorse events they do not control. This is completely normal and sensible. I am sure they would love to have the money - but they aren't going to put themselves into a position that violates policies put into place for a good reason. And to save you the time of a click and page load:
  Christian Childrenâ(TM)s Fund made the decision to decline the gift from Gen Con, LLC as the request presented to us gave the appearance that CCF (the organization) was an endorser or supporter of a gaming convention, which CCF was not. As many non-profit organizations, CCF is selective in its endorsements or support in order to maintain the integrity of its name and logo. We cannot lend our name to an event for which we have no involvement. This decision should in no way be interpreted as CCF holding an opinion on Mr. Gygax, gaming enthusiasts or the game Dungeons and Dragons.

Give it to someone else.

[ouphie]

Hell, send the money to Child's Play. Great cause and run by gamers.

Mods + spawns = creationism

[sinij]

D&D supports creationism, why else would monsters get spawned? They are not evolved, but just appear in spots = intelligent design.

Re:Mods + spawns = creationism

[2short]

So you're offended that people think you believe one particular wacky thing, then quickly dismiss roughly half of people who call themselves Christians as "not really" because they belong to denominations without bishops? Somehow I'd have thought following the teachings of Christ might have been more the telling point, but whatever; I'm not sure you have much standing to get all offended at that point.

Anyway, as an atheist (who no doubt slipped from my Christian upbringing due to a lack of bishops) let me assure you that I don't believe all christians are creationists. It is however, fine to assume creationism of all who bring up their Christianity in order to claim oppression from internet posts that don't actually make any mention of it. People that eager to force their religion into things either are creationsts, or are, as you apparently claim, so eager to be offended it would be cruel not to give them the chance.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Ron Paul would have taken it

[EEBaum]

I'm reminded of reporters slamming Ron Paul for taking money from white supremacists. He defended the action, his rationale being along the lines of "better I use it for my message than them for their white supremacy."

Who supports who?

[Tsu-na-mi]

I could see CCF's viewpoint if they were the ones giving money to Gen Con, or lending their logo as a sponsor/supporter, but instead, it's Gen Con giving CCF the money. How is accepting a donation supporting the donor? This sounds like BS to me.

Re:ERROR CODE: ID10T

[scottblascocomposer]

You forgot one:

An atheist on Slashdot is characterized by their remarkable ability to build and knock down ridiculous straw men for a religion of which they remain willfully and almost entirely ignorant, and yet continue to claim rationality as their guiding light.

A similar level of ignorance of any other subject on which one would claim to speak intelligibly would rightly result in that person laughed out of the room. Only here can we be so anal about parsing code correctly in joke posts and yet admire ourselves for so completely misunderstanding and misrepresenting all religious belief, belief which has claimed the adherence of many of the greatest minds the world has known.

Paint 'em all dumb, I guess, if it allows me to feel special and earn the fleeting respect of my fellow /.ers.