Thanks for the idea Florin. I am glad there is someone out there finding out about these fundraising opportunities.
I got the idea from
Otto's post at the MF's forum.
I votes for Imminst. It was pretty simple.
You don't have to vote for only one charity; you can vote for up to 20 in Round 1. For example, if 2,000 people vote for both Imminst and the MF, that's 2,000 votes for Imminst PLUS a separate 2,000 votes for the MF. So, you don't need to choose between any of the 20 possible charities; you can vote for all of them.
Is there any place to see the progress of the voting? If we are down by 10s of thousands of votes, then I am sorry to say but we probably cannot make up that ground. However, all we have to do is make it into the top 100. Previous social network vote fundraisers have netted a couple thousand votes for life extension related charity. Is this enough to make it into the top 100?
Since I haven't see any "scoreboard" page, I don't it's possible to keep track of which charities are in the lead except to guess which ones might be and look at their page. I'll look at a few popular charities which typically get a lot of attention and see how many votes they have. However, it might be very time consuming to try to see if 100 charities have over 2,500 votes which was about what the 3banana contest produced. So, I might need help in compiling such a list. Whoever wants to help can post vote totals in this thread. In any case, more than about 5,000 votes, which was what the AMEX contest produced, is unlikely.
Another confounding factor might be the MF's participation which could field additional votes, but I'm not sure how many they can produce.
I also recall the AMEX challenge when MF got the required votes but then was rejected by the panel. Is there a chance of that happening this time?
There is an Advisory Board similar to the AMEX panel but its function seems to be restricted to making sure that the contest is fair.
From the
"Advisory Board" page:
The Advisory Board has been assembled to promote the spirit of giving and help oversee the voting process. Their role is to screen the finalists in Round 1 and Round 2 and to help ensure that the charities meet the eligibility requirements. They will also award an additional $1 million. The Advisory Board and Chase reserve the right to eliminate any organization that does not meet program eligibility requirements. The Advisory Board consists of experts from a range of philanthropic areas.
Here's a summary of the
eligibility requirements:
Eligible charities must be 501©(3) organizations with an operating budget of under $10 million, and must meet the other listed requirements. A Charity that, by itself or through an affiliated entity, discriminates on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability, age, veteran status, medical condition, citizenship, ancestry or marital status is not eligible. Complete eligibility requirements for charities can be found in the Official Rules.
I've seen nothing in the
Official Rules rules that indicates that the Advisory Board can arbitrarily disqualify an eligible charity.
SENSF wants Imminst help in getting 10,0Imminst to accomplish?
I'm not sure what you mean by "...getting 10,0Imminst...." Anyhow, it's not possible, unfortunately, to vote for the SENSF due to their current lack of 501c3 status.
Might we "wear out" our supporters? This one would be easier since there is no financial requirement.
Well, I would assume that's up to each supporter to decide if they want to vote or not. Since this is such an easy way to help and requires no financial commitment as you've pointed out, I can't image why they'd be "worn out."
Edited by Florin Clapa, 24 November 2009 - 05:51 AM.