From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V2 #94 Reply-To: chakram-refugees@smoe.org Sender: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk chakram-refugees-digest Saturday, April 13 2002 Volume 02 : Number 094 Today's Subjects: ----------------- The Deliverer (was Re: [chakram-refugees] <>) [cr >) [cr Subject: The Deliverer (was Re: [chakram-refugees] <>) Spoilers for On Friday 12 April 2002 08:43, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: > > LOL! Forgive me for snipping much of your "Xena had more important things > on her mind" argument. That (along with Gab's self-responsibility) I can > fully understand. I think both of us tend to focus on the action/strategy > aspects, rather than the relationship/emotional ones. However, as I've > said before, the latter perspective has given me a richer appreciation for > the show, making me more aware of subtler "action" going on underneath. > > In this case, I'm not dealing with whether Xena *should* have paid more > attention to Gabrielle, or even if she was capable of knowing what was > going on in Gabrielle's head or anticipating what might happen. Indeed, it > was somewhat of a mystery to me how/why Gabrielle went off on the courses > she did. I simply meant that Cande's comments offered me a reasonable > possibility. > > X&G often balanced each other and were usually most effective when they > did. With Chin and Britania (as with the crucifixion vision), Xena > basically withdrew, becoming totally consumed with her mission. Again, > understandable to me. But the result was to leave the impressionable, > searching Gabrielle with many questions and no where to turn for answers. > She didn't have Xena's practical, probing nature to rely on. But Gabrielle > was a woman of action too, so she found roles for herself and directions to > pursue during Xena's emotional absence. Do I blame Xena for this? No. I > think both of them did what was human under the circumstances. I'd fully agree with that interpretation. > Without the balance they provided each other, Xena allowed herself to > succumb to the darkness she felt necessary to reach her goals -- completely > missing the piece that might make things go awry. Gabrielle did the same in > succumbing to her idealism. They allowed more selfish motivations to blind > them to the potential consequences of their actions for each other, though > each might say she was defending the greater good. In effect, each felt > and acted "alone." Well yes, they did. But neither one had any reason to suspect what was going to happen. So in that regard, I can't criticise either one for that. > For me, it's not just about these two individuals being sensitive to each > other because it's expected or "nice." OK. Often 'insensitive' is used as if it were the most heinous crime either of them could commit ;) I see you didn't mean it in that sense. > In the Xenaverse, they represented > a balance that -- when off-kilter -- often had grave consequences that > affected the greater good. And when they worked in harmony, they not only > benefitted each other, but also those around them. Cande made me realize > how that emotional "vacuum" in these situations affected the action, > regardless of whose responsibility it was for those actions. It adds a > layer of "sense" for me that might explain the "why" of the actions in the > larger context, beyond the "what." > > -- Ife Well, OK, what would have happened differently if Xena and Gabs had talked about their feelings or whatever? I don't see that it would have made a lot of difference. Xena (for whatever motive) went to Britannia to help Boadicea fight Caesar. I rather think Gabs would have agreed with that, given Khrafstar's obvious appeal to her. So they would have ended up in Britannia anyway. And it seemed to me that Gabby was genuinely interested in Khrafstar's little group (shades of Eli and his disciples?) and I imagine it was by tacit mutual agreement between her and Xena that she ended up with K and company. There's nothing in the episode to indicate that they had a disagreement over it. And in view of Gabs' determination to not kill people, her being elsewhere than a battle makes all sorts of sense. So I can't see what difference 'harmony' would have made, to be frank. Thelonius ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 02:00:37 +1200 From: cr Subject: Deliverer and Legacy (was: Re: [chakram-refugees] <>) On Friday 12 April 2002 10:29, Mirrordrum wrote: *** spoilers for Deliverer and Legacy, also Coming Home and Been There Done That and The Reckoning *** > > > / > > > / > > > / > > > / > > > / > > > / > > > / > > > / > > > > > > At 12:20 AM 4/11/2002 +1200, thelo wrote: > > >Specifically, in The Deliverer, Xena had every reason to believe that > > > Gabs > > > > > > >was safely out of the way with Khrafstar's flower children, > > > > Xena had no way of > > > > > > knowing what K's bunch were really like. > > > > > > i say, we must be watching very different shows. are you talking here > > > about the xena who, let me see, well, the one who for example in > > > is the only one who remembers everything? (big snip) > > >Remember, with the God of War, she knows him very well. > > not in or, well, i prefer to assume this is their first > face-to-face and that we are being shown just how quick a study and how > clever a planner she is. Umm. Though The Reckoning is (IIRC it says something of the sort in the ep) the first time Xena's actually seen Ares face to face, there's a clear implication IMO that she's familiar with the way he operates. I seem to recall suggestions from time to time that Evil Xena was a fairly close disciple of the God of War. > the xena i imagine really is as i described her > above. her encounter w/ caesar left her in a state of constant vigilance. > her encounter w/ lao ma expanded and refined her skills and brought her a > title. i'm not quite sure what her encounter w/ akemi and then odin and the > valkyries left her with, besides baggage. she trusts almost no one and with > good reason. villagers are endlessly fickle and her own army turned on her > & beat her to a pulp (). the gods are certainly capricious and > untrustworthy. besides, she knows herself so she knows just how dark dark > can get. That's my Xena ;) > > She has no > >experience of Dahak and in fact doesn't even know he/it exists. > > true enough--well, she knows this "one god" exists because k-star talks > about him and it's certainly made more complicated than just xena being > blind. the point is clearly made, however, that she's so focused on caesar > that she doesn't know gabrielle's missing the first time and didn't even > figure out that boadicea was lying to her. do you really buy that an > attentive xena wouldn't catch that? i don't. > and of course ares warns her but i certainly don't expect her to trust > ares. then when the cloud starts rising above dahak's temple, xena > suddenly comes to her senses and zooms off to save gabrielle which, imo, > shows some of that good spidey sense. now it's also made more complicated > of course by xena's history w/ the one god of the israelites. xena gets > fooled just like the rest of us. you've got to admit that it's rare. Do I? (Tries to work out if md's contention is correct) OK, I guess it probably is. You're right. (Stop nudging me like that, KT, I tell you she's got a point there much as I hate to admit it). > thing is, i'm not arguing that xena's bad to have been focused on caesar, > simply that i'll bet you wouldn't have been astonished if xena had twigged > k-star as a phony right off the bat. Now in that, you're quite correct. I have to admit a certain amount of hindsight myself - the first time I saw the ep I thought what a nice genuine guy Khrafstar was. Now when I watch the ep I notice an evil glint in his eye. But to address your point - Xena isn't infallible. She's usually right but not invariably so. > and if she had and had warned > gabrielle, you'd all have merrily chirruped on about how bad gabrielle was > for not listening to xena and screwing everything up again. don't look at > me like that. you would. if a case can be made for xena to be right and > gabrielle to be wrong you know perfectly well you'll make it every time. > Well of course I would! Somebody has to. And if Xena *had* spotted that Khrafstar was an all-round no-gooder and warned Gabs, then certainly Gabby should have taken some notice of it, wouldn't you say? ;) > i, on the other hand, am *merely* suggesting that in this case, as was > implied in the rift arc, xena might have been the least little bit > distracted. i am merely sugGESTing that xena's acumen is so great that she > normally knows what's best and that she can tell who's naughty and who's > nice very rapidly. i offered as examples her rapid assessments of hope, > najara and aiden. 'Normally' being the operative word of course. > >As for the chacky flight in Coming Home, I think it must be a smart chacky > >with loiter capability.... programmed to target the Furies only. > > oh, so this is suddenly an independent facility of the chakram, not xena's > consummate skill? whoa! now that's got to be a first for you. would you > likewise suggest then that it the 43 caroms were not in fact > calculated to a nicety but were simply smartchak tracking ability? aw come > on. admit it. xena's better than that. It was 29, not 43! Now, back to the chacky's abilities - no matter *how* Xena threw it, a pure ballistic chacky with no supernormal powers could *not* stay aloft for the required duration (quite aside from the fact that Xena couldn't know just where the Furies were going to be). In BTDT I have argued in the past (to a member of this list, incidentally) that cumulative errors on each bounce would mean that it was physically impossible to launch the thing so accurately that it would be anywhere near the target after 29 bounces. > > >There was heaps of reason to be suspicious of Hope, if you recall, not > > least being her inflammable conception and her remarkably rapid > > development. > > sure. of course there were. we were privy to those reasons and i agree that > xena should have been suspicious. i just never bought it that a mother > (gabrielle) who loved her child would believe that child was evil just > "because xena said so." i know, i know, gabrielle has no sense and this is > a really old argument and it's very much personal opinion. all i'm saying > is that xena, as usual, is spot on with hope and isn't remotely distracted > by the fact that it's gab's child. yet she misses the boat w/ k-star. Umm, yes. What I said, she's not infallible. She trusted Caesar too. Once. > also the xena who has had to give up her own child would know what she's > asking of gabrielle and would have been more persuasive and less harsh. i > just think xena was written wrong. i think she's more caring than that. I do agree there, that struck me at the time. > but that's beside the point. if she'd been written the way i think she'd > actually have behaved, you'd have to have rewritten a large chunk of season > 3 and the rest of the series. Would you care to elaborate on that? > >Najara and Aidan, Xena also had reason to suspect. > > pretty flimsy. again, i thought she just has this hard-earned, hard-learned > distrust and needle-sharp sense about people. gabrielle looks for the good, > xena looks for the bad. besides, it's necessary to the story for her to be > right about them and gabrielle to be wrong. that's just what gabrielle > does. Yep. It's in her job description. "Wanted. Sidekick. Must have good intentions and be wrong about almost everything". > > But she was fooled by > >Caesar, Julius Caesar (the first time), and admittedly by Khrafstar ... > >maybe he reminded her just a little of Borias? > > *chuckle* could be. he had rather that effect on me. > > > So your statements as to Xena's infallibility are not entirely correct, > > dear > >md, > > hardly anything i say is entirely correct. and i didn't say she was > infallible. indeed, i went so far as to say she's not. i only maintain that > it would be consistent with the xena we know and love to have discerned, > under normal circs, that k-star was not what he seemed. it's understandable > to me that she didn't, of course, but i attribute that to her having been > distracted by caesar and lulled into complaisance by the fancy that they > were talking about the god of the israelites who may, or may not, be the > one god of eli. Yes, that was certainly a good red herring, wasn't it? I did like that little exchange - "This is not the One God of the Israelites?" "No. That one will be taken care of in due time". > i should also say that i agree with you that the gabrielles of this world > should be expected, and allowed, to take care of ourselves and not have to > have some super hero always running around cleaning up after us. i never > did like that and have written about it extensively. i realize it was > necessary but i balked. i don't think it was xena's business to have to be > keeping an eye out all the time. but had gab been scripted to take care of > herself and not always get into trouble, a lot of the plots would have > evaporated. Quite true, part of the job description. > > > personally, i thought the writers made it fairly clear that we were > > > > > > supposed to buy that xena was so distracted by her understandable > > > hatred of caesar that she wasn't paying attention to gabrielle's latest > > > bit of foolishness. > > > >Yes, that is so. But what I'm saying is, that's only to be expected and > > not (IMO) particularly blameworthy. > > agreed, as noted above. perhaps i misunderstood. i don't assign blame and i > thought the plot line that had gabrielle hating xena for "betraying" her in > britannia was horribly contrived and the height of bogus. OK, then we do agree on that point. > > Zeus knows (or would if Herc hadn't killed > >him), there have been enough eps where Xena's ability to focus is a useful > >attribute, so it is, IMO, perverse to blame her for it this time. > > and i don't. i merely say that it is implied throughout the series that > xena has a commander's ability not only to focus but to see a broad picture > and unlike gabrielle, she can spot a phony. gab's a sucker. xena, not so > much. i don't think she's to blame for gabrielle's pregnancy. i do think > they opened the door to the possibility that she was obsessed with her > hatred of caesar and that she would blame herself. Yes, I would agree with you there, on all points. > k-star blames her and > you know xena. when they pass around the guilt, she always takes second > helpings. hence, ultimately, the old "hate is the star" thing and > penultimately, the crucifixions. but as we are shown in , it's > all fate. so what could she do? i'll be damned if i can figure out what > people see in that episode (, that is) but don't get me started. I think you're nicely started, warmed up, and ready for a few more quick laps, actually ;) > > > and the gods know that gabrielle never *did* listen. . .until > > > > > > the penultimate moment. and the one time she does listen, well, you got > > > to admit if you thought a fitting ending that she listened well > > > and bit the bullet hard. give her her props for that anyway. > > > > > > and you know, i don't think xena would have allowed gabrielle to make > > > that kind of decision. > > > >Which kind of decision? The one at the end of FIN, do you mean? > > well, i mean had xena been in gabrielle's place (as she sort of was in > ), she wouldn't have *let* it happen. thus the quoted interchange > below. Umm, OK, you mean she wouldn't have let Gabs choose to die? Hard to say. Xena's always been the one to punish herslf, as you noted, and if it was necessary for Gabs' soul or redemption or whatever that Gabs stay dead, I think Xena might well have accepted that and - reluctantly - gone along with it. > > > X: "Gabrielle, in everyone's life, there's something that goes > > > beyond the greater good. That's what you are in my life. I > > > wasn't about to let you die out there if there was something I > > > could do about it." > > > > > > G: "What if it was my choice?" > > > > > > X: "Especially if it was your choice." > > > > > > (thanks whoosh! transcript) > > > > > > i mean, what's that about? > > > >Oh yes, that was the one where Gabby killed Desert Boy by mistake. OK, > > what was the point of Gabby dying there? > > i'm not quibbling about that, tho i could. i'm talking about the specific > point of the quote, viz.: there's something that goes beyond the greater > good, you're it, and even if, especially if, it were your choice to die > (for something you'd done wrong), i wouldn't let you." nobody should take > that kind of attitude, imo, with someone they respect. period. this is a > parallel with the situation in its essentials. xena believed she > needed to stay dead. gabrielle didn't care about the greater good, only > about xena. she could have dumped the ashes but she didn't. she listened to > xena. what xena's saying in is that regardless of the greater good > and regardless of what gabrielle felt was right, she would make the > decision *for* gabrielle. would you really be willing to accept a > relationship where somebody would feel justified in taking away your > responsibility in the world? isn't that exactly what you were talking about > in ? it was gab's decision to go w/ k-star. she should have > borne the consequences regardless. i agree. that's why i don't "blame" xena > and i don't buy it that gab would hate xena for "betraying" her. horse > pucky! OK. I can follow your argument, amazingly enough. ;) In Legacy: I quite agree that so far as Gabs' soul or guilt or what-have-you was concerned, it should have been Gabs' decision, not Xena's. I think that in strategic terms Xena might have been justified in quietly bopping Gabs on the head (no NOT with a chacky! ;) so she couldn't confess and derail the anti-Roman campaign that Xena and DB's people were putting together. (Which is a quite different reason, of course). I think that Gabs should have considered, along with her sense of guilt and the fact that a Roman prisoner was likely to suffer for her 'crime', the strategic implications and maybe decided to keep shut up and just let her conscience hurt her like hell. Thelnius > i'm snipping the discussion abt what xena did in . Too late! :) > i could discuss > it but this post is already out of hand. Agreed (snipping the rest) Thelonius ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 13:18:57 EDT From: MistNY@aol.com Subject: [chakram-refugees] Starship Safe and Sound Appeal I heard from the Starship Foundation. The Safe and Sound donation drive is winding down, and they are still about NZ$15,000 (less than US$7500) from reaching their goal. I have a number of checks that are being sent off, and just wanted to remind everyone that if they would like to donate to the Safe and Sound Appeal that they should do so soon. You can send checks or money orders payable to Starship Foundation directly to the Foundation or through Sword and Staff. You can also donate by credit card (contact me for info on how to do that). Either way, it will help them to reach their final goal of $100,000 to launch the program to help abused children. Best, Mist Sword and Staff P.O. Box 224 Floral Park, NY 11002 ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 14:22:01 EDT From: MistNY@aol.com Subject: [chakram-refugees] Article on Fandom and Charity The following appeared in the NonProfit Times Direct Marketing Edition dated March 15, 2002. Thought it would be of some interest. Mist 'Fanboy' Fundraising - Online Fan Groups 'Net Cash By Craig Causer Theybve been referred to as geeks, fanboys and fangirls, Bronzers, Philes and even Amazons. To the tea and crumpet Masterpiece Theater crowd they are the lunatic fringe: The mini-Mulders who know the difference between the bite of a vampire and the mark of El Chupacabra, the Mexican Goat Sucker (who have four fangs, not two), and Slayerettes that recite, in alphabetical order, the genus and species of each Buffy the Vampire Slayer demon. It is zealousness not often understood by the masses. But nonprofits are quickly learning that online fan groups are composed of a rabid population of people worldwide who are willing to join a charitable cause. Warner Bros. Back in 1997 was a fledgling television network that launched a show based on the box office disappointment Buffy the Vampire slayer. A small but fiery fan community arose and began discussing all things Buffy on the official Websitebs posting board. Members of the posting board called bBronzersb b dubbed after The Bronze, both the name of a club in the show and the posting board title b decided to gather that year for a meet and greet of fans. What matured from that inaugural eventis the Buffy Posting Board Party (PBP), an event designed to bring the online community together along with cast members to raise money for the Make-A-Wish Foundation. bthat first one was not a not-for-profit event,b explained Bryan Bonner, vice president of public relations and marketing for Posting Board Party Committee, Inc. bWhen we thought about doing it again one of the people on ourboard of directors said, bWhat do you think about becoming a nonprofit organization ourselves and then turning this event into a charity fundraiser?bThat is what we ended up doing for all the subsequent parties. So we incorporated it as PBP Committee, Inc. which is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization.b Being a registered nonprofit alleviated many of the problems inherent in raising money over the Internet from fellow fans. Keeping in mind the sensitivities of a broad base of attendees, the committee ultimately decided on the Make-A-Wish Foundation because it was the least likely to raise issues among the group. Since 1998, the committee has developed a strong working relationship with the Make-A-Wish Foundations of Greater Los Angeles (MAWGLA). Since its inception the annual event has raised a total of approximately $50,000 with Februarybs party alone drumming up $20,000. Pretty impressive numbers considering a donation was not factored into the $75 admission price. The main event is a silent auction and raffle. bWe will get very unique and one-of-a-kind items like crew jackets, prosthetics used in special effects,autographed scripts, things you canbt find anywhere else,b Bonner said. ball of those proceeds from that go to the donation amount. People who attend the party are also free to make an individual donation.b Bonner admitted that the committee leans on Make-A-Wish to help hawk the event through press releases and the Make-A-Wish web site. Both organizations pool their contacts to secure attendees that have included almost every major actor from Buffy and its spin-off Angel. It isnbt an official partnership however. bItbs not a bWe at the Make-A-Wish Foundation dub you the official co-sponsor or us,b but itbs a relationship we really cherish,b Bonner explained. bIf someone throws a third-party event for us, which is what the PBP is, we try to show up as much as possible,b said Melissa Paul, assistant director of development at MAWGLA. Itbs all about showing appreciation and also getting some exposure, she added. Make-A-Wish representatives appear on stage with Buffy cast and crew during a check presentation ceremony. It may sound like a venture where MAWGLA can just recline and fan itself with $100 bills, but there are a few stipulations that third party organizers must meet. bWe have a document called a Benefit Proposal and Licensing Agreement. Granted, there are people who do things behind our back and without our permission. But anyone who calls here to propose and event is required to fill out one of those documents, b Paul explained. bBasically they sign off on a bunch of rules and regulations in terms of using oru name and our logo and community. We have certain fundraising rules because webre a territory-driven organization. People who are throwing an event for us in L.A. are not allowed to solicit outside of our territory. I try to foster as close a relationship as possible because I feel that itbs important to closely monitor things like that. You never know what can happen.b Bonner admitted that the PBP Committee gets a tad territorial about the event. The committee generally handles the brunt of the work that has included, among other things, securing corporate donations. Past donors have included Nautica Jeans, 20th Century Fox and Commercial LoanCorp. For PBP 2002, Brentaobs Books donated a percentage of sales during toevent to Make-A-Wish. Score trading cards also hopped on board and displayed its new Buffy card game. As a person who has seen her share of events, Paul can appreciate both the work it takes and the reward that MAWGLA reaps. bThey raise anywhere from $11,000 to $13,000 for us and theybre very consistent,b Paul said. She added that whatever the final tally, itbs never too little or too much. Theybre out there The coordination process is generally preceded by one incident that gets thefundraising ball rolling. For Cynthia Schmidt, Webmistress of the official Gillian Anderson Web Site (GAWS), it was contacting the mother of the X-Files star. Andersonbs mother runs a support group for people dealing with neurofibromatosis, a genetic disorder of the nervous system that has stricken her son. She opened the door to holding a Web-based auction to raise funds to combat the disease. Itbs been almost six years since she got the thumbs up and Schmidt has collected more than $420,000 for Lanham, Md. Based neurofibromatosis, Inc. (NF). Last year the auction ballooned to 700 items and $145,000 was raised. bIn doing the Web site I found that everyone wanted to send Gillian something and they want to get back a photo,b said Schmidt, who previously served as NF Webmistress. bI figured she probably had so many gifts from birthdays and other things that she would probably rather have her fans donate to her charity in her name. So I said letbs auction off signed Gillian stuff and we hit a goldmine.b The gold mine includes a vast array of X-Files memorabilia as well as interesting items that Schmidt has dreamt up. A visit to the X-Files set sold for $25,000 last year and one lucky winner paid $17,000 to spend a day on the set as Andersonbs guest, proving that the truth is out there and it has plenty of zeroes attached to it. Other attention-getting goods include a recorded answering machine message, a 10-minute phone conversation and a dress worn by Anderson to the Oscars. The success of the on-woman-run auction was so apparent that Yahoo! Contacted GAWS last year and offered to host the event. A fundraiser that had initially started as an email auction is now gearing up for a second year at the powerhouse site. The bonus of Yahoo! Taking over is there is an added public reaction element, the nonprofit doesnbt pay a dime, and Schmidt is freed from the time-consuming task of writing up each auction item. To reassure conspiracy-minded X-files followers, or bPhiles,b people are contacted to donate items on NF, Inc.bs letterhead, Schmidt explained. Fans donate items in addition to those that are supplied by Anderson, who is also NF honorary chair. While the items get sent to Schmidt, NF is happy to provide a receipt for any tax-conscious donor who requests one. NF simply reimburses Schmidt for the postage that is paid out of her pocket to ship the auction items. Everything else is donated including the packing materials, thereby saving the nonprofit additional costs. bThe time webre saving is enormous because this the one who is actually soliciting the donation articles,b acknowledged Gwyneth Charest, executive director for NF bThose are sent to her, she has to maintain them at her house, take care of shipping the items out to the winners and coordinate the checks that are sent to her. She also does a lot of bookkeeping and cataloging of the articles, taking pictures to they can be posted on Yahoo!b All told, Charest said the organization would need a couple of staff members to tend to the auction if it where handling it on its won. While Schmidt gladly accepts the weighty auction responsibilities, NF grants her the necessary permission to do so, keeps track of everyone who has donated, contributed or taken part in the event and composes thank you letters. If anyone request verification the nonprofit also confirms the legitimacy of the event. This year Charest has signed a letter of introduction that Schmidt will sent out to solicit contributions as a part of the auction. While successful, itbs not all about auctions at GAWS. bFor three years webve had one of those non-event fundraisers where they say donbt come to the event and give your money instead,b Schmidt explained. bWe hold a holiday party thatbs held online and people can send in the ticket that they can print on theWeb site. They pay to not show up to this party and they pretend theybre all ata party online. Gillian will come in and submit some posts and things like that. We get about $1,000 to $2,000 and webre only charging $5.b Schmidt clarified that GAWS does not accept money made out to her. Everything is made out to NF, Inc. so she does not have her hands in the middle of any money. Warrior Princess The notion of donating dollars raised via fan events seemed like a simple enough gesture for Sword and StaffB Webmistress and Xena fan Debbie Cassetta. Following a gathering of admirers at a New York City XenaFest the group decided to give $4,500 raised to a local childrenbs charity. Cassetta quickly discovered that being a Good Samaritan wasnbt as easy as anticipated. The nonprofitbs former public relations head refused the money stating, as Cassetta recalls, bwe donbt want to be associated with a bunch of Amazons.b Clearly she was dealing with a man who had not been exposed to Wonder Woman as a child. The gift eventually found its way to an AIDS-related organization and Cassetta decided to wash away the bad taste left by her attempted gift by starting up the Sword and Staff, a site where Xena fans across the globe could go to contribute to worthy causes. Since 1997 the site has raised more than $360,000 for a variety of organizations. bI select the charities,b said Cassetta. bOne of the things Ibm really cautious about is making sure that theybre legitimate. If you look at the groups thatwebre working with there are no questions there. Lucy Lawless is the star and Starship (Foundation) is a charity of hers. Essentially, theybre childrenbscharities, charities that deal with womenbs issues or environmental groups.b Xena has a diverse international fan base that is tied together through organized groups, clubs and mailing lists. Cassetta keeps and eye on most of them to spread the news of the latest Sword and Staff endeavors. The site usesonline auctions, a marketplace and donation and volunteer drives to conjure up support. All contributions sent to the Sword and Staff are again made payable to the charity that they are directed toward and payment must be made via bankcheck only so there are no problems with bounced personal checks. Although she has a close relationship with the Starship Foundation, a New Zealand-based organization supporting the Starship Childrenbs Hospital, many of the nonprofits Cassetta features on the site are not contacted in advance. Generally she just sends them ba bunch of checksb and one that relationship isdeveloped most charities are happy to get envelopes filled with additional checks, she said. The inherent difficulty with her fundraising technique is that while it requires little if anything from the nonprofit, it runs on her integrity.Thatbs one quality that has not exactly been a hallmark of denizens of the Web. Cassetta, however, is a known commodity in the Xena community. In addition to New York, she has attended events in London and Canada and feels a certain level of trust has been built. The reward for Sword & Staff donors has been the feedback received. There are very few organizations that do not take the time to send a thank you, Cassetta said. She cited on example where one celebritybs foundation accepted $10,000 from the group and refused to even type up a cover letter thanking donors. bI was told that they did what they were required to do by law,b she added. Fundraising for nonprofits without formalizing a partnership is not always easy but itbs worth the time and effort for Cassetta. bI can understand where theybre coming from. Ibm a an unknown entity, Ibm an bInternet Personb which in itself has become negative, and they interpret that as I am saying I want to represent your organization and they donbt want any part of that,b said Cassetta. bBut the reality is that Ibm not presenting myself as having anything to do with you. I just want to send you gobs of money.b ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ End of chakram-refugees-digest V2 #94 *************************************