NetSquared enables social benefit organizations to leverage the tools of the social web.
net2 local
Net Tuesdays or Net2 Local gatherings provide a chance to connect locally with all those interested in the intersection of social technologies and social change. There are new groups forming every week: Join in!
net2 updates
The first wave of the NetSquared.org makeover is now live! There's more improvements to come, but in the meantime we'd love to hear what you think.
Chagora
Submitted by CulturalEngineer on November 24, 2009 - 10:43pm
A Charity and Cause/Campaign Service Provider Characterized by Associated Individual Donor Accounts accessed via the Recipient's and others' Chagora widget or the Chagora website itself which is Attractive to Recipient charitable and issue/candidate oriented nonprofits because of its enablement of Exclusive Transaction & Feedback Capabilities of vital interest to Donors and the general public.*
Chagora Assumptions
CHARITY and especially POLITICAL MICRODONATION (Cause/ Candidate contribution under $1 alone or in concert with others) has very Powerful and Unrecognized Potential as a USER ATTRACTANTIfit can be made easy enough for the donor to give and economically feasible for the recipient to receive.
And can CATALYZE Donor usage of this account for ALL CONTRIBUTION in both the POLITICAL AND CHARITY sectors for reasons of convenience, unified accounting, reporting and additional functionality and benefits discussed elsewhere.
The CHAGORA System thus is attractive to potential charity and/or candidate/cause RecipientsBOTH because of the direct services Chagora offers (accounting, reporting, visibility, specialized group fundraising capabilities, unique charity/corporate sponsorship capabilities, etc.) AND the ready Donor-base it can provide.
And forms the basis for a Long Tail Aggregator with high-margin profitability NOT dependent on advertising or transaction fees.
The Power of Small Money, Large Numbers & Immediate Feedback!
Attempts to revitalize our political system have focused attention on the issue of money in politics. All are good tries, and all are from the wrong end. It's not just too much big money… it's too little SMALL money. Political MicroDonation under $1 is a proximity substitute for conditions under which Representative Governments first arose and operate best… and are essential for scaling better leader development and decision making.
When teamed with more effective information gathering and dispersal (e.g. Sunlight Foundation, etc.) as well as new technologies of association (OpenSocial Initiative, Causes, etc.) its capabilities will be quickly seen and hence its growth will be self-reinforcing...
Most people never give to a cause or campaign…They will! They don't give now because they assume they can't make a difference… It's too much, too rare and too difficult!
They're hungry for a voice; a mechanism to bring them IN.Chagora does it and does it profitably. The design as a for-profit structure with ultimate exit-strategy by ownership transfer to the Donor-base is a unique element intended as a check & balance mechanism empowering the commons in a reasoned way against imbalances concurrent with civilization scaling.
The Mechanism and the Fish
Political MicroDonation is a catalyst and needed an enabling mechanism. And the enabling mechanism itself is a Hook for a priceless fish. The Fish is a natural concentration of Donors gravitating to such a system... And an essential tool for empowering citizens in the commons!
How does it work
The Donor's P.U.D Account(Pooled, User-Determined Account) with accounting and reporting makes previously non-viable and therefore non-existent transactions feasible and FUN.
Essentially the User participates in a Chagora Trust account with as little as $10 and relinquishes ownership of deposited money, but retains full discretion on its distribution (within defined limits relating to charitable or cause-based entities).
Further, the account, once established persists whether funded or not and has functions related to social networking for civic purposes which are expanded on elsewhere. Chagora takes no part of the transaction between the donor and recipient. CHAGORA's Design Structure suggests that even those with NO interest in politics at all will eventually be drawn in as well!
Monetization
Recipient Subscription Fees, Charity and Cause/Campaign Services, Charity-Corporate Sponsorships, Accounting Services, FEC (and other) Reporting Services, Supplementary Web & Tech Services, Event Media Fees, etc.
(See my comment below and the link to a recent Washington Post article on problems with fundraising by the facebook application "Causes" and consider what effect Chagora's capability would add.)
*This user-controlled specialized account has additional potentials depending on a number of factors and its application in different countries and legal systems will vary... however its underlying fundamentals are universal.
In brief, the development I'm discussing arose from a very clear conclusion that civilization scaling issues make enablement of political micro-contribution (<$1) a vital part of political representation. This has more to do with facilitating frequency and breadth of contribution over quantity of contribution by any particular individual, and the general expansion of participation that results. Its mere existence, in addition, sets up some beneficial political/social feedback loops and counteracts others not so beneficial in ways both obvious and obscure. (And in the end will actually reduce the role of money in politics altogether but that's a longer case to make than would be appropriate here.)
Good article; I've felt that way for a while... and a quote from the article:
"The median gift through Causes is $25. The majority of Causes' participants have received no donations through the site. The median charitable donation through more traditional means is $50, according to the Center on Philanthropy."
This is TOO HIGH and stops many from participating altogether... and even for those that do... it's nature makes it too infrequent to engender more meaningful connection. BUT WHAT IF...
What if people could easily give 25 or 50 cents or even a dime at the same time they joined that facebook group (and then, in most cases, never visit the page again)... would it change anything? And then if that group had ways to keep them involved... but in small, manageable ways that add up.
What if when you joined one of these causes you could throw in 50 cents (not now a viable transaction for a number of reasons)... Would that be a burden that would stop you? Would they have raised more money? Would you feel more involved or less? More or less likely to revisit that group and follow their activities? More or less likely to give again?
Facebook and Causes: The Problem
Framing the issue:
From the Washington Post:
To Nonprofits Seeking Cash, Facebook App Isn't So Green
Though Popular, 'Causes' Ineffective for Fundraising
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Good article; I've felt that way for a while... and a quote from the article:
"The median gift through Causes is $25. The majority of Causes' participants have received no donations through the site. The median charitable donation through more traditional means is $50, according to the Center on Philanthropy."
This is TOO HIGH and stops many from participating altogether... and even for those that do... it's nature makes it too infrequent to engender more meaningful connection.
BUT WHAT IF...
What if people could easily give 25 or 50 cents or even a dime at the same time they joined that facebook group (and then, in most cases, never visit the page again)... would it change anything? And then if that group had ways to keep them involved... but in small, manageable ways that add up.
Here's a specific example on facebook:
The Cause Support Our Troops
It's got a lot of facebook members: 436,545
All of whom I suppose must support the idea!
From whom a colossal total raised: $3,437!
What if when you joined one of these causes you could throw in 50 cents (not now a viable transaction for a number of reasons)... Would that be a burden that would stop you? Would they have raised more money? Would you feel more involved or less? More or less likely to revisit that group and follow their activities? More or less likely to give again?
Tom Crowl
http://CulturalEngineer.blogspot.com