Hacker News Reader

Comment by moreaccountspls | Hacker News Reader

It's a bit sad that you've taken a wonderful, altruistic act and cheapened it by feeling the need to broadcast it on the internet :(

View on HN

Charitable acts being lessened by others learning about them is possibly the most harmful widespread opinion that exists today.

Your comment makes it less likely that others will broadcast their charitable giving, result in less people being prompted to give, and overall reduce the amount of giving in the world; all for no gain for yourself or anyone else. You want "a bit sad"? Dwell on that for a while.

There's a "Curb Your Enthusiasm" episode where Larry David's character donates to a museum with his name on the donation. There's no self deception for him; he wants to do something good AND he wants the credit. And that's totally fine! The character is self aware enough to know that part of his motivation is selfish.

My point is that by not acknowledging the selfish part of "wanting the credit", the author comes off as not self aware [or disingenuous, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt]. That's what I meant by cheapening it for them.

You sound like an idealist. You expect people to do good without getting anything out of it. The fact that they seek recognition reduces the value of their gesture in your eyes.

If the good is done and lives are improved, does it matter is someone felt good about their act?

Re: "cheapening", who exactly is ranking the charitable act and why does their perspective matter? I was raised with that ideology but eventually abandoned it.

Nowadays, I care a lot more that something helpful is done that the signaling attempt to admit our desire for recognition or hide our involvement in the good deed because that mindset prevents a lot of helpful giving in my experience.

> cheapened it

I don't follow. Does broadcasting this on the internet reduce the number of lives saved? The point of altruism to save lives, so as long as those are maximized, I don't see any "cheapening" happening.

The point of altruism when you broadcast is to feel good yourself.

The number of lives saved remains the same whether you broadcast it or not.

So, what's the point in broadcasting?

Very true, as St. Matthew has written

"But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing"

A lot of charity is not for the sake of helping someone, but for the sake of making oneself to look noble, get publicity, or earn money (like those "buy X, then we will donate Y" promos).

Personally I don't have such bad feelings about that, as it is a win-win situation very often - those who need get something eventually. I can tolerate a little bit of hypocrisy in that case.

From a religious perspective, that verse would have merit.

From a purely utilitarian perspective, it make no difference. If it encourages others to follow suit, its a net bonus if anything.

Others are convinced to follow on your footsteps.

The reason I started giving to AMF was because a friend of mine posted about their giving to AMF. I would have been less likely to do so if I hadn't seen that post, so broadcasting probably led to more lives saved. Another friend of mine said he was also motivated to give by seeing the very same post.

Anyway, I didn't claim that broadcasting is positive, or has a point. I simply responded to the claim that broadcasting "cheapens" altruism.

People broadcast what they ate for breakfast! Doing the same when you have donated (any amount of money) doesn’t lessen it in any way.

It lessens it for the author because they're looking for validation from someone in some type of way, the same way the breakfast people do. If you're content being someone that needs validation from other people for your actions, then sure, it doesn't lessen it for them.

I'm not sure if you have to "need" validation to want it. I think the author deserves every bit of ego boost they get from posting this

I bought two of the limited-edition hardback books -- one for myself, and one to gift a friend. I'm very happy that Derek informed me that the proceeds are being donated to charity. Heck, I probably would've purchased more as gifts had I known about his plans ahead of time.

Maybe he had other reasons to post? Maybe it attracts people toward him that think similarly? Maybe it’s to showcase his thought process on how he likes to maximize his contributions or his thought processes in general? Maybe it’s to make his customers even more happy that the money went to a good cause? Maybe it’s to popularize his way of thinking about money and gratitude? Solely feeling the need to broadcast to the Internet is a tough assumption to pin on Derek. Assuming other people’s motives may say more about the one assuming.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com