CCF / Gen-Con Charity Auction Cleared Up

[frankthedm]

Again, if you read the articles in question, there is no evidence of this. Neither Gen-Con nor Christian Children's Fund have said this. Gen-Con's own statement says that there was a misunderstanding and someone, somewhere along the line (be it by a lackey of GenCon or CCF, they don't say) wrongfully inferred that it was because of D&D. As noted in the above official statement from GenCon:

"We later found out that we had been misinformed as to CCF’s position in regards to D&D and Gen Con, but by then we had already chosen Fisher House as our charity, and announcements and promotions were already made and in the works, such that it would not have been possible to change charities at that point." (bold for emphasis)

The word "misinformed" is the evidence.

Did you read the post right above yours?

Yes I did. I read it very carefully. The important part of the wording was the wording in "we had been misinformed". To me that means Gencon is indicating it really did believe that was the CCF policy after the first contact. As to the exact situation, Brown Jenkins is correctly concered about that in his posts.

Because as I said both sides haven't actually answered the questions I raised. They have done an excellent job of making it sound like they have, but they really haven't.

Indeed.

Sheesh, that's good enough for me! Why the need to drag out the drama that was started by false rumors in the first place?

Because right now it is either Gencon's or CCF's fault this all stared. And Gencon, even in it's damage control spin, to benefit the CCF, is still saying Gencon was the misinformed party.

 

[Dire Bare]

Because right now it is either Gencon's or CCF's fault this all stared. And Gencon, even in it's damage control spin, to benefit the CCF, is still saying Gencon was the misinformed party.

You're seriously basing your fears on the use of the word "misinformed" as opposed to "misunderstanding"? When both parties make it perfectly clear this is a no-fault misunderstanding? Jeesh!

The situations is easy to parse out, especially if you've ever worked for a . . . company, or a . . . . anything really, including a charity.

Either an individual employee of CCF gave wrong info, by mistake, to an individual employee of GenCon . . . or the CCF employee gave correct info but the GenCon employee misheard or misinterpreted the info. Simple, easy, passes the "Occam's Razor" test. No one is "at fault", it was a simple mistake that bloomed into full-blown internet nerd rage based on rumor and not facts.

If you're convinced that CCF is intolerant and hates the D&D but backpedaled to save face (and GenCon's just being nice about it) . . . that just makes no sense. If the organization DID have rules to prevent its association with the evil and satanic D&D, why bother lying about it to the D&D community? If they didn't want us I doubt they'd be concerned if we figured that out . . .

Anyway, like so many threads on ENWorld these days, we're making mountains over molehills.

 

[Vorput]

anyway, like so many threads on enworld these days, we're making mountains over molehills.

qft

 

[frankthedm]

You're seriously basing your fears on the use of the word "misinformed" as opposed to "misunderstanding"? When both parties make it perfectly clear this is a no-fault misunderstanding? Jeesh!

I am basing my suspicion on this choice of wording. Maybe I am giving gencon too much credit, but in my frame reference, the people who write press releases choose their words very carefully.

Either an individual employee of CCF gave wrong info, by mistake, to an individual employee of GenCon . . . or the CCF employee gave correct info but the GenCon employee misheard or misinterpreted the info. Simple, easy, passes the "Occam's Razor" test. No one is "at fault", it was a simple mistake that bloomed into full-blown internet nerd rage based on rumor and not facts.

There is always fault. To me, the most innocent possibility was that CCF had policies against letting Gambling events use it's logos. And since Gambling is also sometimes referred to as Gaming that could have lead to the CCF saying no to providing the promotional material. But since I have heard no specifics, just spin-speak, my "the glass is half empty and probably poisoned" outlook tells me the full truth is still out there even if both sides now want to bury it.

EDIT: The OotS Author also is wondering about this "Clarification".
Giant In the Playground Games

 

[MichaelSomething]

Looks like Gen-Con didn't qualify for the "CCF Partner" prestige class. Gen-Con took the "CCF Donator" feat but missed a few skill points in diplomacy so it doesn't meeat the requirements. Oh well, maybe next level.

 

[mlund]

I am basing my suspicion on this choice of wording. Maybe I am giving gencon too much credit, but in my frame reference, the people who write press releases choose their words very carefully.

Yes. Having worked with them, they tend to either write with accuracy or stretch the language to its fullest extent for the greatest benefit for the company. "We were misinformed," is press release speak for "the decision-makers got the wrong information." It does not itself, technically, imply that the error was generated by CCF. "We were misinformed," can also be used as "we were misinformed by our volunteer," or "we were misinformed by our partners at LiveGamingAuctions.com," just as accurately as "we were misinformed by CCF."

However, it is bad for business to point fingers in any direction here. They plan still working with LGA.com, continuing to fund-raise for CCF, and continuing to use volunteers and other staffers. So GenCon is never going to satisfy your curiousity.

EDIT: The OotS Author also is wondering about this "Clarification".
Giant In the Playground Games

You could just as easily refer to Gnome Stew.

But maybe we should refrain from such since circular citations of blogs as authority worked so well the first time.

- Marty Lund



I think we'd be better off wiping the egg off of our faces and moving on than continuing to protest that there is no egg.

 

[Mistwell]

I had emailed the charity to ask about why the donation was allegedly declined, and got a response similar to the above responses (copied below).

My take on it: The charity does not lend their name to the collection of donations by companies which are financially unsound. GenCon had filed for a form of bankruptcy at the time, and hence the charity's policy (which must be followed by the way, as it would be in their non-profit corporation bylaws and minutes) dictated that they decline the opportunity to have their name attached to the collection of donations from a financially unsound company like GenCon.

This is not an unusual policy, and is usually a good one. Bankrupt companies operate under a different set of laws and duties than non-bankrupt ones, and often have additional red tape they need to cut through to get things done with finances, and there is the risk that donations can get tangled up with those bankruptcy complications. If those bankrupt companies end up going out of business, they can harm the goodwill of the charity whose name is associated with the bankrupt company.

All things being equal, a charity prefers to have its name attached financially sound organizations rather than financially questionable ones, and GenCon fell into the later category.

There is no evidence, at all, that this had anything to do with D&D or gaming.

Thank you for writing and sharing your concerns. Please know that we take your email very seriously.



There appears to be a misunderstanding which I would like to correct. When Gen Con contacted CCF about its auction, we were pleased to accept donations. However, we couldn’t lend our name for publication because our policies have specific criteria for endorsements. For example, we take into consideration whether the organization is financially sound.



We were unaware that this had caused any problem or concern for Gen Con until we began receiving emails. This decision was in no way intended to be a reflection on Mr. Gygax, gaming enthusiasts or the game Dungeon and Dragons. We have the utmost respect for the gaming community and were touched by the generosity expressed through your auction. We were disappointed that we were not the recipients of the donation but we were pleased that another worthy organization benefited.



We realize this has become a topic of discussion in the gaming community and we hope you will help us by sharing this response. It is my understanding that Gen Con also has posted information under “Forum” on its Web site.



The needs of children are great and we welcome your support. Should you wish to learn more, we invite you to visit our website at Christian Children's Fund: Improving the Lives of Children - Sponsor a Child Today.



Again, I thank you for taking the time to voice your concern. Your passion for gaming and your support for children are admirable.



Sincerely,



Cheri Dahl

Vice President,

International Communications and

Fundraising

 

[Scribble]

Edit: What I would like is some clarity on the CCF position that they have nothing against D&D and that the misunderstanding has to do with technical issues, not that they didn't want their logo publicly published and associated with D&D. Especially because if not things sound even worse so that while they can't publicly associate with D&D they are willing to secretly take the money.

Could be something as simple as Gencon didn't have the ability to make the logo appear in such and such color in the listed size etc. I know my company has very strict rules about how our logo can be used. The color it has to be (exact color down to the photoshop number thingy...) what size it has to be, what can't be done to it (you absolutey CANNOT under any circumstances take the little tag line off for example) you can't change the background...

All of our logos are available to us done by the art department, and they are the ONLY ones we can use.

Even our powerpoint presentations are already done for us, we just have to insert pictures and text.

So if someone said they would handle the printing, and production of our logo for example we wouldn't be able to allow it.

It could also be something such as, they can't put their name on it because it shows as endorsing the product. While they don't have any baias against it, they don't endorse ANY product.

Only way to know for sure would be to ask what their usage policies are.

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt since they said they have nothing but respect for gamers and the gaming community.

 

[mlund]

My take on it: The charity does not lend their name to the collection of donations by companies which are financially unsound. GenCon had filed for a form of bankruptcy at the time, and hence the charity's policy (which must be followed by the way, as it would be in their non-profit corporation bylaws and minutes) dictated that they decline the opportunity to have their name attached to the collection of donations from a financially unsound company like GenCon.

Ding. You win the Internets.

Let me emphasize something that can't be emphasized enough: if a non-profit does not strictly adhere to their bylaws the IRS can pull their tax exemption and shut them down.

Sometimes that means you have rules or regulations that seem "silly," but jumping through a few hoops or having to pass on a few sponsorships is nothing compared to the tragedy of suddenly leaving the people you support swinging in the breeze because you brought down the wrath of the IRS on the charity and now it is gone.

We've got 8 active members on a good day in my fraternal organization non-profit. If we meet on the 2nd Tuesday of the month instead of the 1st Tuesday one too many times the I.R.S. can pull our tax exempt status. If we handle more than $2500 in revenue - even just as a collection point for distributing the money to a woman's shelter - we have to file special tax forms. We're also at high risk for an audit, and don't have the man hours to handle a full IRS audit nor the money to hire a CPA. Still think we need to get our "priorities straight?"

- Marty Lund

 

[Dire Bare]

There is always fault.

Dude. If by fault you mean that someone, somewhere, made an error, well than, yeah. But if you mean by fault that there is someone to blame and castigate, sometimes there just isn't. Lighten up.