or otherwise supposedly "pissing it all away" on luxuries anyone more rich and privileged would rarely if ever be judged for buying, even and especially here
The point is, it doesn't matter if you take the money and spend it on drugs. If you're addicted to drugs, drugs are a basic need. You have to have some amount of them while you're getting off of them, even if that's your plan. And if it's not, I really don't care except insofar as it keeps you from finding housing and handling your other basic needs.
The problem is not buying drugs with donated money. The problem is failing to take any measures to meet basic needs with the money. To take a $4000 donation and then spend it all on ??? and not use any of it to secure shelter, or food, or other basic needs is a problem. And it's a problem that cannot be solved by receiving more donated money. Maybe if they got the attention of a billionaire who could give them $50k, then they could satisfy all of their desire to spend money on ??? and still have some left over to spend on food and shelter. But since none of us are billionaires, we simply cannot fill this pit with money alone. If we here on /c/mutual_aid truly want to help the user in question, all we can do is try to convince them to change the way that they are handling what money they do acquire.
We're not mad that money we gave is being spent on stuff we don't prefer, we're not mad at the user in question at all. We're trying to get through to the user in question that this path they're walking leads only to an early death and that matters to us because all we want is for our comrades to be safe and healthy.
Does "rachel" ring a bell at all? She was poor, recently homeless, and a drug addict.
Funny you should ask. Those of us who have given to the venmo of the person this discussion is about, know that the first-name she gave on venmo (which I believe is not her real name, given a conversation about payment-app opsec she had shortly after joining this site) is Rachel.
I will note, however, that I recall the original Rachel being banned for violations of rules relating to trans issues (I seem to recall the term "truscum"), not run off of the site for making bad decisions. Not trying to argue about the broader point, just mentioning my recollection of those events.
Wati, what the fuck, it's the same fucking person? The same one who bragged about scamming people the first time? Goddamn, we're a bunch of fucking marks here
I somehow missed the scamming allegations, but yeah she posted a lot of personal details that matched up with the old storyofrachel on cth. I've just been assuming it was the same person but also I missed all this drama.
I am pretty sure "rachel" bragged about getting one over on all of us etc etc? or did I imagine that? p. sure they went off the deep end, not us
arguing about how she "scammed" them by buying drugs with the money
but they bragged about doing that tho
there's a reason they were banned....
To my memory, Rachel was actually banned for unrelated instances of certain queerphobic comments. That's according to the modlog as I recall it. Ultimately it had nothing to do with the incident you described. There was also genuine evidence that her account was actually taken over by someone else, leading to that post. But ultimately that wasn't the reason she was banned.
Before that, there was an actual transphobic witch hunt directed against her and other trans users of this site by wreckers off the site. Back when this place was new and called chapo.chat, we had regular raids coming in from kiwifarms and transphobic harassment discords pulling shit like that all the time because their attention had followed us here from the reddit banning of r/chapotraphouse.
I recall her calling me a f****t at the same time she was bragging about scamming me, so I don't really appreciate you suggesting the anger was unwarranted
Honestly, I was pretty upset at finding out that Rachel was back on this site and doing the exact same shit. You caught some friendly fire here and I apologize
You have no idea what the person who donated that was thinking. As far as I am concerned, this is between that user and some rich donator who had too much money to spare and related to this user's struggle. This comm is for the good for the community, and this kind of directed anger toward one situation none of us can fully understand is not helpful to anyone else who has been sincerely helped by c/mutual aid.
You have no idea what the person who donated that was thinking.
It doesn't matter what the person who donated the $4000 was thinking, the money could have literally appeared from thin air and nothing relevant to us here on this comm would change. It doesn't matter where the money came from or what the person intended. It wasn't their money anymore. It was the money of the person who requested donations, and they could do with it whatever they wanted. What we're trying to do here is convince that person to change the way they spend their money so that they don't end up dead in a ditch or a drug den within the next few years. Because that would be a bad outcome and we'd prefer to see a better outcome for our comrades.
Yes, and what I am saying is that Hexbear does not have the power to help this person by changing the rules of this comm. Your criticism cannot touch anything you gleamed from them by their posting on this site because every day they are out there fighting for survival unhoused.
Ultimately Hexbear is not a crisis service, we have very little avenue for directing change in this persons life other than supporting their claimed efforts to live a healthier life. You can choose to not believe they are genuine and stop donating, but there is nothing Hexbear can do but ban them on the basis of speculation. What does that solve? All we can do is lend support in whichever ways we can, and one of those ways is by giving them spare cash.
Leftists generally accept the systemic nature of social conditions. Individual circumstances are given, inherited from the past. Social problems like poverty cannot be reduced to mere individual choices.
On the other hand, the given-ness of our lives does not imply determinism and a lack of free will. Marxism depends on the existence of free will, for without free will there cannot be revolution and social change.
I agree that if someone asks for money, then it is valid for someone to use that money on “vices” just so they can feel human once in a while. I believe that money given freely should be spent freely.
I feel that in this comm, the requests tend to be specific. “I need money to buy some Chipotle” or “need a place to stay tonight” etc. Those requests do impart a responsibility on the recipient. Not an abstract “individual responsibility” that erases social conditions, but a direct personal responsibility to real Hexbear users who probably themselves do not have a lot of money to give.
To say that responsibility does not exist is to say that free will does not exist, that misusing the money was determined from birth and inevitable. I think this is ultimately a destructive view and does not actually help people long term.
Whether advice is helpful really depends on where it comes from; is it paternalistic, or does it contain an empathetic understanding of socially given circumstances?
I tend to agree with lifting the rule, but there would have to be moderation against comments that are paternalistic, and that will be a tough line to walk since it is such a gray area.
Marxism depends on the existence of free will, for without free will there cannot be revolution and social change.
You are very much misunderstanding Determinism, comrade. Determinism is less about worrying that the future is set in stone and more about understanding that the trajectory of the future is determined by the forces applied in the present.
There are of course many degrees of determinism depending on the philosopher. In western philosophy (which includes Marx) I think it is accurate to contrast determinism with free will. Marx and Marxism are often accused of holding mechanical-deterministic views of history in which revolution is seen to be inevitable in a mechanical sense. This is plainly not the way in which Marx conceived of history, in fact it is exactly the opposite. For example, writings like his Theses on Feuerbach, especially Theses 1 and 3, in which he criticizes the deterministic views of the mechanical materialists which neglect the essential role of human activity (free will).
I'm not looking to start a philosophical debate in the middle of a mutual aid struggle session, comrade. But if you are immediately assuming human activity = free will, you have already put the cart before the horse.
Unsolicited advice from Internet randos is probably the least effective form of "aid." Why would anyone consider or care what a stranger has to say?
Realistically, outside of money, people in a public anonymous forum could:
-
Pretend to be job references for people applying for jobs.
-
Help people pass certification exams or even do their homework.
That's pretty much it.
I personally think this comm should be more geared towards raising funds for any gofundmes, not just for people from this website. There's so many gofundmes from Palestinians, and it's kinda weird that we don't have a sticky about it. There's an entire website dedicated to vetting those gofundmes: https://gazafunds.com/. If you think they're all scams or whatever, there's a gofundme by the municipality of Gaza itself: https://gaza-city.ensany.com/campaign/6737
Yes, not all anonymous randos asking for money on a public anonymous forum actually need the money, which is why this comm should be geared towards gofundmes that can be vetted on some level. All those "uh aktually I don't want to give you money because you're a junkie who will blow the money on drugs" whiners can be redirected to donate to the Gazan gofundme instead.
Good idea, but this comm should still be open to regular users too, can't forget about them. This comm has helped me so much in tight spots and generally speaking it seems the same for most users. I tend to think people coming here for help do need it.
Outside of that we do from time to time get posts raising money for indigenous comrades.
-
Taking care of a persons needs is always priority #1, but at times, said person is unfit to handle money in a way that reliably alleviates those needs.
this has been on my mind a lot but I don't think there's really a good way to articulate my thoughts or a good solution for it, it's just hard for me to wrap my head around someone posting
spoiler because I'm not trying to call out a specific person but I mean, it's kind of a specific instance and might be recognized
about getting like literally two months' worth of my wages as a donation and then asking for more money a week later, like
I guess I feel a mix of jealousy, disbelief, and just like loss by proxy that this mana from heaven seemed to just disappear without benefit lasting even longer than a week
but i'm going to shut up about it because I'm not trying to be an asshole, it's just like, idk, really wack to me that that happened
I've given people money through here from time to time, and this definitely made me less likely to do so in the future
Absolutely, the flippancy some users have with our comrades' hard work is really disappointing. To say that $4k is some miniscule amount of money, or being like "actually I spent hundreds of dollars on doordash
" wtf
I don't think you should pretend it's only "kind of" a specific incident. We literally all know who you mean and saying you're going to shut up about it and then posting it anyhow doesn't really change what you've said. Not that you shouldn't have said anything, clearly you aren't the only one to feel off about it, but don't pretend it can be anonymized, it's just subtweeting.
I don't know what, if anything, should be done, but I also don't see how a rule that didn't exist when that happened is a factor.
This comm is ultimately 95% just charity for people in our little online community. I still think that's a good thing on the whole, but I think we all would prefer if it could be a more structured form of aid, but it can't unless people organize a structure (and mods allow it ig).
idk I just tried to do what I could to semi anonymize it while still gripe about it and give an opportunity for someone to not read about it, idk what else I coulda done other than say nothing :/
I don't know what, if anything, should be done, but I also don't see how a rule that didn't exist when that happened is a factor.
yeah I wasn't trying to say whatever rule change happened was a factor, I just thought to mention it because of the part I quoted from the OP because idk when else, if ever, it'd be appropriate to mention. I don't want to make a post about it y'know
This comm is ultimately 95% just charity for people in our little online community. I still think that's a good thing on the whole, but I think we all would prefer if it could be a more structured form of aid
I mean I agree, this place is a truly bright light in an otherwise bleak present, and although I'm not in a position to really help out others I am so grateful to see the help that's been given
I just really wish in this case that money could have gotten this person into a better situation for at least a month or two
I just really wish in this case that money could have gotten this person into a better situation for at least a month or two
Yeah, I'm sure they wished for that too. Idk what griping does to help them or anyone else is all, besides make them feel bad. A one time cash infusion is good but its not enough to overhaul a life, to overcome all the barriers put in front of a person. I don't really have a point here I guess.
Edit: EelBolshevism put it better above.
If you needed that money, you are free to ask for support as well. If you don't need it, then why do you care where it went? its not your money nor are you seeking similar donations. Straight up if I became homeless I'd be fucked. I'd probably just die. I have like every leg up in the world but I still can't kick any of my bad habits even when they're self destructive. If I got an influx of money I'd 100% spend it on fast food or something. And people would judge the fuck out of me for it. I do more indulgent shit than that now, but nobody judges me because I didn't have to beg for that money, I work a job. But I don't deserve this any more than anyone else, I'm stuck in the same mental rut but with different life circumstances. And so unless/until there's a program that's going to care for homeless people outside of capitalism, giving them shit is a standby to keep them afloat at least, and if they are lucky, maybe a leg up and out (but that can't be an expectation, they have to be ready to change and its pretty hard to get your shit together when you don't have reliable food and shelter)
it's just that it was like a lot of fuckin' money? and
100% spend it on fast food or something
literally years worth of that???
like I don't blame someone for spending on vices, I am just saying that yes, here, I don't think this person was the best steward of $4k+ dollars if it evaporated in a week, which is the basis of what I originally quoted and replied to
Hope this helps as like an insight, but this person your talking about clearly lives amongst some kind of irl community of other unhoused people. No one suddenly smokes up even $1000 dollars worth of meth in three weeks, so get that thought out of your head if anything like that was on your mind. It's not a stretch to imagine a lot of it going toward others in their offline life. For unhoused people, these communities are very transitory in that people appear and disappear fast, but they all have the same solidarity from being unhoused. Multiple times this user has mentioned helping out other unhoused people with money donated.
I would be very careful using the word scammer this lightly. And if this actually even is storyofrachel (I have not personally seen the evidence of this yet, but I do admit this would be very uncanny similarity if this were just a coincidence).
No one else who sent money in small amounts could have been deceived because this money was sent on the basis that this user is homeless, and has unmet basic needs that money can help them fulfill. This is true regardless of anything else this user may have lied about or did under different accounts.
The queerphobic comments made by storyofrachel that originally got her banned are disappointing and, it would be unfortunate to learn this is the same user. But remember this is a young, unhoused, trans person themself. Those comments were made years ago, and nothing like that has ever happened again since. I'm personally willing to forgive them, but I understand anyone who else who is not. But since this is all speculation, it would be unfeasible to make a case for getting them on ban evasion.
Ultimately none of that makes them a scammer, though. They are a genuine member of Hexbear and I have seen them posting normally for at least six months under their current account.
EDIT: Almost forgot to address the $4000, lol. If anyone was scammed, it was the person who sent this all at once. That was just one donation, and we don't have anyone coming out claiming they were scammed. Without someone reporting they were scammed, it's hard to make the case that this was a scamming. That's why I think this whole incident should just be shelved for now.
Counterpoint: giving needy people money does not entitle you to anything in return. If you are going to be weird about it - don't give money. Miss everyone with the paternalistic nonsense.
Edit: and for the record I have given money to someone who was almost definitely scamming and I never mentioned it to anyone. Giving money anonymously is exactly what it says on the tin.
Somewhat understandable but you are advocating for witch trials instead of an outright ban which would be a much more sensible solution.. which leads me to believe you haven't thought this through at all or aren't serious.
If it makes you ideologically mad that resources aren't being perfectly allocated or whatever... Maybe unsubscribe from the comm or at least propose a solution with some thought behind it. Jesus.
you are advocating for witch trials
Who is advocating for witch trials and where did they advocate such a thing?
Ok are we going to appoint someone to vet everyone's claims or what. This is what I mean. Not a serious solution.
I feel like you have no idea of the context of this discussion and are just trying to stir shit. No one is talking about vetting claims.
I'm sure I don't know the context. Everyone should if we are discussing something important.
As far as I'm aware this wasn't even perceived as a problem until a 1 off situation. That 1 off situation being highly controversial in this community.
You'd be wrong there, a similar situation with the same user (to my knowledge) being involved that happened at the start of hexbear/chapo.chat and a bunch of users got banned, including the user people donated/gave the money to. It's been ongoing since the chapotraphouse subreddit days.
It really seems like you have entirely missed their point, to be honest. All they're advocating for is a rule change to facilitate discussion, not in any way trying to identify liars.
So you need to either tell me how you are going to verify people's claims or how you are going to protect against social engineering that reddit-like sites are famous for. It literally isn't possible. All the claims are true or they aren't. This isn't complicated.
This is a wild point to argue when you literally admitted not having context
It’s not anybody else’s problem if they ignore/tell you to kick rocks for purposeful ignorance
Ok well I am glad my instincts about this not being a serious post were correct then
“If context isn’t served to me on a silver platter, I will simply ignore”
A user of this comm got a substantial amount of money from donations here and it didn't work out; they basically ended up in the same place as they were within a month without durably improving their situation. There were some people who thought this person might have squandered the money in various ways, potentially in ways that were not healthy.
It's difficult to separate those concerns from putting conditions on the aid, but I personally think some of those concerns were out of genuine desire to see the person not fall into self-destructive patterns. I don't know if it's appropriate or not to have those concerns, but this rule change prevents any discussion or suggestions that might be more constructive.
I hope this is helpful framing of the conversation without denigrating anyone.
Certainly better than grandstanding. Thank you. My points stand. There is no way to vet any of this. It is either caveat emptor or full ban. I am fine with either.
Where in any post are they advocating for vetting? You have a really strong opinion about something everyone already agrees with but somehow that means you disagree with their point of offering advice instead of just money?
-
Somebody asks for a few bucks for some ramen.
-
The same somebody is pretty open about their use and/or addiction to things on the same forums that they've asked for a few bucks
-
Commenters chirp about "not being an addict" and "don't give money to this person because they are probably going to use it for drugs"
I'm hoping this is what the rule is in reference to. Could also be comfortable with it being in reference to comments telling them to go find a food pantry or shelter etc.etc. when they weren't asking for helping finding or navigating those services.
I am 99% positive, nobody is asking to vet the user who's asking for ramen money if, in fact, they are going to be using it for ramen instead of drugs or booze or socks or something.
-
I've been able to help people get housing here for free before. Though not on this comm specifically, people DM me and I hook them up with people I know that have extra space.
If you drop a few thousand bucks into a homeless addict's lap and expect them to snap their fingers and magically get all their shit together, you're as naive as a toddler. Of course a chunk of it is going to go towards vices and self-care. What were you expecting? "Ah yes, this has immediately solved all my problems, let me put down a security deposit on a condo and invest the remainder in my 401k."
Sending a stranger money on the Internet is very rarely going to solve anything other their immediate, base level needs. I'm not saying it isn't helpful (and it is in fact extremely cool), but expecting a shot of cash to be as transformative or revolutionary as a real life mutual aid network is magical thinking.
If you drop a few thousand bucks into a homeless addict's lap and expect them to snap their fingers and magically get all their shit together, you're as naive as a toddler.
Haven't there been city and state programs that do almost exactly this and found that, broadly, they are pretty successful and improved the living conditions of most recipients?
Oh no I understand that, but I think saying "just dropping money in a homeless persons lap WONT fix their problems" is maybe reinforcing certain turbo lib, anti-public assistance talking points.
In reality, dropping money in their laps often CAN HELP, potentially a lot. Not always but it clearly often does and hence such programs are a good thing even if there are certain individuals for whom that assistance alone isn't enough.
I don't know the context for this, but I think with the status quo of the internet being that everyone shits on homeless people, drug addicts, etc. I can understand wanting to remove comments that are being critical of the decisions someone has made that led to them asking for help here. There is a time and place for offering advice, and most of the time people here are not looking for it nor are they even in a position to hear it, and they are definitely not going to take much in from strangers. In healthcare settings it takes hours of building rapport to broach these topics, so unless you know the user well its pretty much pointless to be critical of someone unless you want to make them feel like shit. At best you could link people to resources that could help, or invest the hours to get to know them, then start trying to give advice.
I do think if this comm is going to be called mutual aid then there should be more than just posts requesting donations.... though it can't be as bad as the languagelearning comm not having stickied resources for learning languages
where we all pretend that personal responsibility doesn't exist
That's totally fair. Was considering blocking this group because it's stressful watching so many down on their luck people asking for money. It was putting me on [more of ] a doomer path in a sort of learned helplessness way.
I totally get that, and that's why a big rule here is that this is the only place on the entire site where people are allowed to make these kinds of requests for money or help. Since lemmy allows you to block individual communities, no one need any engagement here they don't want. If you block the community, you'll still see the regular posts from users that frequent it, but you'll never even know they do it because the rules preclude bringing it up elsewhere.
This requirement is the main reason a block button for communities was implemented into lemmy in the first place, and as a result we see this community thriving only after that boundary become solidified. It's a step closer to getting a coherent system of informed content warnings going.
The solution to any person you think is abusing this community is to point it out to a Hexbear admin or moderator. I assure you they are active, even on this comm, and have thought long and hard about the rules, they just do not make their presence known as much as they did historically on Hexbear. If they disagree, feel free to point it out in a post, but after the community consensus lands on no harm done? At that point is where the solution to said problem user being distasteful for you is to donate to something else and block the comm for a while. It is not your problem, nor does it become your problem because the few bucks you sent them didn't totally transform their life. It's also not your problem if others disagree and continue to help, it's all confined to this comm, no one who doesn't want to see this has to see it.
Here's my personal experience as a person who fortunately received money during crisis from comrades on this comm:
The first time was after I had to turn down a scab job offer while running out of money. I was on the verge of homelessness at that point, and could no longer afford my Buprenorphine prescription, which my life and ability to function on a daily basis depends on. That was my first post in c/mutual_aid. My Hexbear account is four years old. I was there during the first three days of the site's existence and the entirety of the lifeboat discord before that. All under this account, which admittedly gives me an unfair advantage, but that novelty wears off quickly.
I got 120 dollars within a day of posting, enough for a two month supply of Buprenorphine. Every single cent went to that. This was urgent for me, people with similar experiences donated money to me because they understand what this is like. They almost certainly looked over my post history, and that was enough for them to trust I'm not a scammer because Hexbear is still a small enough site that communities can form where most people recognize each other from their time spent browsing.
I don't believe anyone would say that was problematic given I followed all the rules of this comm. That includes keeping all mutual_aid posts and discussion in c/mutual_aid. Since we can either sort by local or sort by all and block this community, no one who wants to think about this stuff need know who's even using the comm for help because they wouldn't have to see the posts made in their feed.
Later on, I found I had my Buprenorphine all taken care of, but had no money for food that I could access. So I asked for $50 dollars for one to two weeks worth of groceries. By then my situation had started to stabilize and was on the up swing. I had luckily found a new job sooner than I had expected, but was flat broke and the first check was still weeks out. I just didn't have enough money for some basic self care and food, and that's the amount I thought would do me well for one to two weeks. I made a second post, but with less elaboration and detail on my situation, had a relaxed tone to show it wasn't urgent, and simply asked if anyone could help out. I only got twenty dollars, but there were more dire ongoing situations and spare money is finite. And that's also a fine outcome! They helped a comrade they related to with what money they could spare to that, it's no problem, it feels good to help people in hard situations. That was still very helpful!
What I'm getting at is that for anyone on this comm that donates, it is an informed decision made because they have money to spare and another person needs it more. You don't do this to change someone with money you expect to lose because no one is perfect. You already knew it wouldn't be enough to permanently change their situation, so how can you, a person who has never met them give criticism about their spending via this narrow look into their life? And for that same reason, why do you believe any of your criticism is applicable to their problems just because you sent them a few bucks and read a few of their posts? You ultimately still do not owe them anything, nor do they owe you anything. The relationship between aid giver and receiver is never transactional. You can't just toss people out of this community because you imposed on them some will to change their lives after sending them any amount of money discussed here.
On the other end of things, donating to someone on c/mutual_aid cannot be enabling as it is typically understood. The rules of this comm enforce a boundary in that no one can make or discuss these mutual aid requests outside of this comm. Which means there is a very easy means of setting boundaries preventing two people from forming toxic relationships involving donations and expectations of behavior. Just giving money to a grown adult known to have a drug problem cannot be considered enabling because regardless of their addiction, they need money to merely exist! If you stop giving them money, they do not necessarily stop using drugs, they find money elsewhere because they also need it to eat, find shelter, and take care of their other basic needs. Can your small donation make them quit their vices? No? Don't be surprised if they use some or all of it for their vices. Enabling requires the presence of the type of a relationship precluded by the way the rules are enforced on this comm.
None of this changes just because the dollar amount is in the low thousands. That was a single donation made by someone who clearly had money to spare. You can not know what any of that actually entailed, and you are projecting paranoia onto this comm as a result.
So ultimately I have to say:
is to point it out to a Hexbear admin or moderator. I assure you they are active, even on this comm, and have thought long and hard about the rules, they just do not make their presence known as much as they did historically on Hexbear.
There is a lot of discussion going on right now. That's all I'm gonna say about it.
Also while I'm gonna encourage the use of the report button to bring matters to our attention, please don't use it as an "I disagree button"
Also while I'm gonna encourage the use of the report button to bring matters to our attention, please don't use it as an "I disagree button"
Definitely! I hope nothing in my comment implied I meant to imply I recommend that, could you elaborate on what part of my comment you're responding to?
it's just a general comment to everyone. I think the only exception to it - on the comms I'm on that is, don't do this to anyone else - is hitting the report button to share a funny bit or crafting an elaborate prank to get one-up on the mods.
For the record, I'm also okay with sharing a funny bit or tagline request on communities I moderate.
Also in agreement, the report button shouldn't be for letting us know you spilled your jice or in place of a downbear.
Oh ok! I just thought it might have in response to me directly since its in reply to the start of my big comment.
"excuse me, but I was looking to donate to a homeless who was good with money. skill issue."
Thank you for being more articulate about something that was stuck in my craw than I could be.
Is it lib of me, that when I find someone deprived of what they need to survive, I'm more inclined to try and find local resources that could be more sustainable? If I hear someone is starving, money is nice but how about knowledge of a place where you can get a free lunch and dinner every day? Or even a free weekly food box? Shelters generally suck, but I feel compelled to at least be like "check out these ones if you haven't, they're a little better."
It's the social worker in me. Some folks just need a couple bucks to pay some intractible cost like rent or medicine, but if someone is dealing with structural poverty, they probably need structural supports yeah?
I worry that it would come off as condescending to be like "hey I'm not gonna give you any money, but Sisters is open for lunch rn and Sunshine has open food box sign ups. Do you need any help signing up for Medicaid and food stamps?"
Should I self crit about this?
If you genuinely can't provide any money but can provide your labor by finding resources for someone, that's cool and good.
If you have the option of providing money in addition to those resources and choose not to, id do some self crit on why you're opposed to giving desperate people money that you can spare
But yeah, the resources are definitely useful in the long run and it would be very kind of you to provide that aid, comrade
