Scott - don't forget: ''When the heart flies out before the understanding, it saves the judgement a world of pains.'' However, some people in this world (and I confess that it has been my misfortune to know far too many of them), will always bristle-up like hedgehogs and put the worst possible construction on the kindest suggestions, in order to rain on someone else's parade - especially if they think that they can seek a cheap thrill by fabulating their worst nightmare: that they are about to be hit in the pocket. Such people inevitably end up looking for bespoke makers of shrouds with pockets and coffins with drawers.
NJS
Bespoke Tailors Benevolent Association
gegarrenton wrote:I'm failing to see how having a special subscription that includes something for this is foisting it upon everyone else?DFR wrote:Yes, if you want to give money to a charity please feel free but do not expect everyone else to want to do so, especially by what amounts to a compulsory levy.
I will make my choices of charity to which to subscribe, you make yours but do not foist those onto everyone else.
The proposal was was an uplift on the price to be given to this organisation. Thus anyone seeking this cloth has the donation foist upon them. Let the OP donate if he wishes, leave everyone else out of it save by choice.[/quote]
I must still be not understanding either you or his proposal. My reading is it would be a special subscription for those who wish to donate. I can't see this as levying anyone?[/quote]
These were the words used:
"a surcharge on a special Cloth Club subscription."
There is no element of choice or expression of desire here. A surcharge is straight forwardly an increase in the price.
Oh, dear.
[quoteScott - don't forget: ''When the heart flies out before the understanding, it saves the judgement a world of pains.'' However, some people in this world (and I confess that it has been my misfortune to know far too many of them), will always bristle-up like hedgehogs and put the worst possible construction on the kindest suggestions, in order to rain on someone else's parade - especially if they think that they can seek a cheap thrill by fabulating their worst nightmare: that they are about to be hit in the pocket. Such people inevitably end up looking for bespoke makers of shrouds with pockets and coffins with drawers.
NJS
[quote]
Exactly my thoughts but I could have written them better ...
NJS
[quote]
Exactly my thoughts but I could have written them better ...
The gent is straightforwardly suggesting a distinct or separate Cloth Club subscription, very plainly.DFR wrote: "a surcharge on a special Cloth Club subscription."
Strangely, the generous idea(l)s of others are sometimes not enough to mobilize me, but the unreasonable opposition they encounter triggers in me a desire to overcome it that mere benevolence (shamefully for me!) seems unable to conjure.
People in need all belong to one nation, in a way. The nationality makes no difference when one can help another. We are talking about tailors who, for objective reasons, find themselves unable to provide for themselves or their families.
What would you do if your tailor found himself in such a situation?
Some would simply take their business elsewhere. Period.
Saint Francis would probably bring him a hot meal every day at lunch (and make do with his one robe
).
Others would sympathize, but have no idea how they could be of any help. In this case, if there is an organization which can be trusted to manage the raised funds ethically, it can be a decent solution for everyone.
I know someone whose aging tailor found himself in great distress as his wife fell sick. The poor man kept running between home, workshop and doctors, trying hard to cope with sleepless nights and disheartening worries. He was on the verge of giving up work, but this would surely have had a depression as a consequence. He even mixed up things on a couple of orders and had difficulty keeping up with deadlines. Instead of simply taking his business elsewhere or giving the tailor a break to see how things evolve, the customer in question (who did have alternatives, though he enjoyed this tailor’s work particularly) tried to boost the tailor’s morale with encouragement and did his best to keep him busy – without overwhelming him with work and short deadlines, though. The tailor seemed to cope better with his challenges and continuing to work was an important element in keeping his spirits from sinking in his shoes.
This was a happy instance when direct material assistance was not necessary, but I wonder what would have happenned if the tailor himself, rather than the housewife, had fallen sick...
Tailors don’t gather fortunes, as far as I know. I am yet to hear of a tailor, who is not also an entrepreneur owning a tailoring house, turning millionaire from his personal needlework. The reality is that tailors who toil all their life, often well into their seventies or even into their eighties, do so because they need it to sustain themselves, and they can and sometimes do end up in misery when they can’t work anymore. Not everyone is able to put aside (enough) money for old age and that is not for us to judge – the reality is that people who worked hard for a lifetime end up in misery. If anyone or anything can help, regardless of being a conational or not, even by a small margin, I see no harm at all in offering this possibilty.
Of course any such endeavour should be a matter of free choice, rather than imposed by a majority or, worse, an individual. That is also not a way of showing the “good guys” from the “bad guys”. A special run of cloth with “silent” subscriptions, in which the names of the subscribers are not published on the LL, with only a total figure that the subscribing members succeded in raising together at the end, would be a good way to do this, in my opinion. All members would be free to subscribe or not to this one offer out of the many provided by the LL. Those who opt out will have made an important saving!
(we could also make the cloth ugly, so the temptation would not torment the non-subscribers 
)
People in need all belong to one nation, in a way. The nationality makes no difference when one can help another. We are talking about tailors who, for objective reasons, find themselves unable to provide for themselves or their families.
What would you do if your tailor found himself in such a situation?
Some would simply take their business elsewhere. Period.
Saint Francis would probably bring him a hot meal every day at lunch (and make do with his one robe
).Others would sympathize, but have no idea how they could be of any help. In this case, if there is an organization which can be trusted to manage the raised funds ethically, it can be a decent solution for everyone.
I know someone whose aging tailor found himself in great distress as his wife fell sick. The poor man kept running between home, workshop and doctors, trying hard to cope with sleepless nights and disheartening worries. He was on the verge of giving up work, but this would surely have had a depression as a consequence. He even mixed up things on a couple of orders and had difficulty keeping up with deadlines. Instead of simply taking his business elsewhere or giving the tailor a break to see how things evolve, the customer in question (who did have alternatives, though he enjoyed this tailor’s work particularly) tried to boost the tailor’s morale with encouragement and did his best to keep him busy – without overwhelming him with work and short deadlines, though. The tailor seemed to cope better with his challenges and continuing to work was an important element in keeping his spirits from sinking in his shoes.
This was a happy instance when direct material assistance was not necessary, but I wonder what would have happenned if the tailor himself, rather than the housewife, had fallen sick...
Tailors don’t gather fortunes, as far as I know. I am yet to hear of a tailor, who is not also an entrepreneur owning a tailoring house, turning millionaire from his personal needlework. The reality is that tailors who toil all their life, often well into their seventies or even into their eighties, do so because they need it to sustain themselves, and they can and sometimes do end up in misery when they can’t work anymore. Not everyone is able to put aside (enough) money for old age and that is not for us to judge – the reality is that people who worked hard for a lifetime end up in misery. If anyone or anything can help, regardless of being a conational or not, even by a small margin, I see no harm at all in offering this possibilty.
Of course any such endeavour should be a matter of free choice, rather than imposed by a majority or, worse, an individual. That is also not a way of showing the “good guys” from the “bad guys”. A special run of cloth with “silent” subscriptions, in which the names of the subscribers are not published on the LL, with only a total figure that the subscribing members succeded in raising together at the end, would be a good way to do this, in my opinion. All members would be free to subscribe or not to this one offer out of the many provided by the LL. Those who opt out will have made an important saving!
(we could also make the cloth ugly, so the temptation would not torment the non-subscribers )Costi. Beautifully written. I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments while, I suspect, not being able to communicate them as effectively.
Most people need to give much more generally, self included.
Most people need to give much more generally, self included.
Costi, I am in complete sympathy with the original poster's sentiment and your eloquent apologia. I wonder, however, whether the proposed mechanism is the best, for quite different reasons than earlier objections--in fact for contrary ones. As I contemplate the proposal, its success in raising funds would depend on the special subscription cloth being of interest to, and suitable for the needs of, the largest possible number. Even the "greatest hits" of the CC have, I believe, relatively modest numbers of subscribers--let alone the unthinkable hypothesis of an ugly CC cloth!Costi wrote:All members would be free to subscribe or not to this one offer out of the many provided by the LL. Those who opt out will have made an important saving!
So I wonder whether some other mechanism might work that would stimulate more participation. For example, offering rewards for donations at tiered levels. For a certain amount, a voucher good for a jacket length of a CC cloth in any upcoming subscription; at a higher level, a suit length; still higher, suit plus two trousers length, etc. These levels would be set so that the cost of the cloth would be deducted from the donation--if the mills were interested in participating in the scheme, they might offer a discount on the reward lengths. I'm not sure what the right multiples would be (basic donation of twice the nominal cost of the cloth?) but perhaps some members with fund-raising experience could opine. For smaller donations, perhaps accessories such as books, bespoke ties, etc.? For more princely donations, perhaps vouchers redeemable for partial defrayment of labor cost of some of the LL certified artisans? (Again, perhaps artisans interested in participating might offer a reduced rate?) The challenges would be to make the scheme simple enough to administer that it would be workable, and to find someone trustworthy willing to administer it. If the Benevolent Association itself could assist, and could provide appropriate receipts for donations to be used for tax purposes, that would represent additional incentive.
I'm just brainstorming here, but it strikes me that charity auctions, (U.S.) public broadcasting pledge drives, and crowd-funding sites like Kickstarter all operate on some version of this model, in which donations at each amount are recognized by increasingly desirable rewards, paid for by a portion of the proceeds.
After reading the ¨serious¨ posts by Couch, Gegarrenton, DFR and Costi, I have second thoughts regarding whether Scot´s proposal -which initiated this thread- was an ironic joke. I took it as such in my response above.
Third thoughts to follow, hectorm...
Dear couch, I greatly appreciate your shared sympathy, as well as your practical suggestions, stemming from the actual experience of the way these things are generally managed. I understand very well that they have been proven to work efficiently toward the goal of collecting higher amounts of donations or contributions. However, I cannot help but wonder - why can't people do these things just out of the kindness of their hearts? Why are incentives necessary? Why do we need rewards and / or benefits for our good deeds?
On the other hand, no good deed ever remains unpunished - and Scot is probably wondering about this while reading our posts here
Dear couch, I greatly appreciate your shared sympathy, as well as your practical suggestions, stemming from the actual experience of the way these things are generally managed. I understand very well that they have been proven to work efficiently toward the goal of collecting higher amounts of donations or contributions. However, I cannot help but wonder - why can't people do these things just out of the kindness of their hearts? Why are incentives necessary? Why do we need rewards and / or benefits for our good deeds?
On the other hand, no good deed ever remains unpunished - and Scot is probably wondering about this while reading our posts here
@hectorm: Ah. Well, the organization itself is real enough. Scot's response to the first objection suggested to me he was sincere.
I don't know whether Anda Rowland's term as Appeal Chairman extends past the February dinner, but if the LL decided to support the BTBA in any organized way, perhaps she might advise on methods?
@Costi: I'm sure many of us do "these things" out of the kindness of our hearts. However, there can be a festive quality to corporate (if you'll pardon the term in this context) philanthropy (charity balls, banquets, auctions, etc.) that raises spirits as well as funds; and it must be said that psychologically, a souvenir of the group effort offers appeal in itself (think of Remembrance Day poppies); while a truly desirable souvenir provides an incentive to increase the level of generosity above what might be contemplated in the cold light of an abstract monthly budget. Not to mention the gain to the beneficiary from any gentle competition that might be spurred among contributors (I believe entire colleges and universities thrive on this). It's also true that such esprit de corps might influence members in their choice of worthy causes to support; goodness knows there are more than enough to go around.
The simplest method might be just to determine from Ms. Rowland or the BTBA staff how to direct checques or credit card payments to the Association's account and receive individual receipts; individuals could, at their discretion, ask that any public acknowledgment of contributions be made in the name of, or in honor of, the London Lounge (anonymous donors are often acknowledged, so clubs should be possible). If someone from the BTBA were admitted to the Lounge, they might maintain a thread in which dates and amounts of any contributions to the BTBA in honor of the LL could be posted (donors anonymous or not at their discretion). This scheme would require no work from the Lounge as an organization (other than permission from Michael for donations to be acknowledged "in honor of" the LL).
But if someone were to auction off a suit length of any future Cloth Club issue, it would admittedly have more frisson. I see Paul Stuart in New York is celebrating their 75th anniversary this month by holding a free sweepstakes for a "$25,000 Paul Stuart Custom wardrobe" (including custom pattern and several fittings for each garment). . . . .
I don't know whether Anda Rowland's term as Appeal Chairman extends past the February dinner, but if the LL decided to support the BTBA in any organized way, perhaps she might advise on methods?
@Costi: I'm sure many of us do "these things" out of the kindness of our hearts. However, there can be a festive quality to corporate (if you'll pardon the term in this context) philanthropy (charity balls, banquets, auctions, etc.) that raises spirits as well as funds; and it must be said that psychologically, a souvenir of the group effort offers appeal in itself (think of Remembrance Day poppies); while a truly desirable souvenir provides an incentive to increase the level of generosity above what might be contemplated in the cold light of an abstract monthly budget. Not to mention the gain to the beneficiary from any gentle competition that might be spurred among contributors (I believe entire colleges and universities thrive on this). It's also true that such esprit de corps might influence members in their choice of worthy causes to support; goodness knows there are more than enough to go around.
The simplest method might be just to determine from Ms. Rowland or the BTBA staff how to direct checques or credit card payments to the Association's account and receive individual receipts; individuals could, at their discretion, ask that any public acknowledgment of contributions be made in the name of, or in honor of, the London Lounge (anonymous donors are often acknowledged, so clubs should be possible). If someone from the BTBA were admitted to the Lounge, they might maintain a thread in which dates and amounts of any contributions to the BTBA in honor of the LL could be posted (donors anonymous or not at their discretion). This scheme would require no work from the Lounge as an organization (other than permission from Michael for donations to be acknowledged "in honor of" the LL).
But if someone were to auction off a suit length of any future Cloth Club issue, it would admittedly have more frisson. I see Paul Stuart in New York is celebrating their 75th anniversary this month by holding a free sweepstakes for a "$25,000 Paul Stuart Custom wardrobe" (including custom pattern and several fittings for each garment). . . . .
-
gegarrenton
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 6:02 pm
- Contact:
Hmm, well I thought it serious, but now I'm not so sure!hectorm wrote:After reading the ¨serious¨ posts by Couch, Gegarrenton, DFR and Costi, I have second thoughts regarding whether Scot´s proposal -which initiated this thread- was an ironic joke. I took it as such in my response above.
-
gegarrenton
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 6:02 pm
- Contact:
Wholeheartedly agree. I feel pretty strongly about charitable giving (for me personally, not projecting onto anyone else), but don't feel shackled to making it some sort of self sacrifice. For me personally it raises the quality of the community I belong to (and beyond), and making it a communal occasion of celebration really embodies the spirit of what it is all about.couch wrote:
@Costi: I'm sure many of us do "these things" out of the kindness of our hearts. However, there can be a festive quality to corporate (if you'll pardon the term in this context) philanthropy (charity balls, banquets, auctions, etc.) that raises spirits as well as funds; and it must be said that psychologically, a souvenir of the group effort offers appeal in itself (think of Remembrance Day poppies); while a truly desirable souvenir provides an incentive to increase the level of generosity above what might be contemplated in the cold light of an abstract monthly budget. Not to mention the gain to the beneficiary from any gentle competition that might be spurred among contributors (I believe entire colleges and universities thrive on this). It's also true that such esprit de corps might influence members in their choice of worthy causes to support; goodness knows there are more than enough to go around.
Couch, you are, of course, right. That's how it works.
I was just (rhetorically) pondering the difference between the simple, heartfelt, natural impulse to help a fellow human being, on the one hand, and the "science" of fundraising, on the other. I am aware that the former does not lead very far on a practical level. The latter has as a consequence the fact that contributors shift from the pure "goodness of the heart" (which remains as a premise of generosity) into the territory of motivation and competition; I can understand how these techniques of applied psychology may irritate some people...
If any of the two is to save the world one day, I believe it is the former - but that's not the objective we had in mind here
I don't know what the scale of the contributions that members have in mind is, but I thought Scot's initial proposal was easily implementable. I am sure fundraising events and actions on a more ample scale, organized by the association itself, shall follow.
I was just (rhetorically) pondering the difference between the simple, heartfelt, natural impulse to help a fellow human being, on the one hand, and the "science" of fundraising, on the other. I am aware that the former does not lead very far on a practical level. The latter has as a consequence the fact that contributors shift from the pure "goodness of the heart" (which remains as a premise of generosity) into the territory of motivation and competition; I can understand how these techniques of applied psychology may irritate some people...
If any of the two is to save the world one day, I believe it is the former - but that's not the objective we had in mind here
I don't know what the scale of the contributions that members have in mind is, but I thought Scot's initial proposal was easily implementable. I am sure fundraising events and actions on a more ample scale, organized by the association itself, shall follow.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests