Charity Gambling

[Accardo]

Not at All, this is sounding like a new development but looking at what charity gambling is all about I think it's definitely of good cause to raise funds in reaching out to the needy but still those involved in the act of gambling are actually loosing and helping a large group of people, sound like something awesome to me and to be frank this manner will definitely promote gambling big time.

I agree with almost everything that you said but I do not agree with the last part. The part that you said 'and to be frank this manner will definitely promote gambling big time'. The reason I do not agree with you is because if there is nothing like this, gambling are being promoted. People will always still gamble if there is nothing like this. So I do not see how this should be termed as a way of promoting gambling. I see it as a way to raise funds instead.

Who goes to offer gifts to charity houses? A lot of them wouldn't have nothing to do with gambling. But, because they've been convinced by the organization that for the sake of Charity they'll need to gamble. That's quite some guerrilla IQ marketing. That'll attract some non gamblers to try gaming, even when they never had it in mind. It's still a form of reachability which I think is not fine for the demography of people who give for charity.

[Sandra_hakeem]

What's your thoughts on this? Is it a creative way to raise funds for a good cause? Or will it simply promote gambling?

I feel like this is cool and doesn't really portray much like the regular casinos do... In postcode lotteries, how ever it goes, it's a win-win in my opinion.. If your postcode ain't selected, others will and that's purely like a philanthropy.
I don't have too much of an information about this. For that reason, I can't tell why it was affiliated with casinos at the long run. My guess is, it's impossible to reach out to every single soul with the benefits from this organization thus, this helps in an even distribution chain ??

Still, I don't like the idea that the charity will start advertising gambling because they need players to start their activity. I think that is why I have mixed feelings about it.

They can't stop advertising gambling because that is where they get their money to support the Charity.

Some people can be so dumb they don't even care about whatever displays on their screen, as long as they type the shit outta their goofy head, they're cool. I love the fact that you explained how this works to him.

[Adbitco]

Have you heard of Charity gambling?

Well can we call it a free will donation to the charity Is that what it means it context?
This type of gambling is cool but partial they are still promoting gambling which is actually risky to the society, Even though there are benefits attached to it. Usually I am not used to such gambling before but I know it would help the less privilege or the needy.

[TelolettOm]

Actually I'm quite confused about charity gambling. Do they implement charity to get sympathy and then will call more people to gamble, so that the more people who gamble, the more charity programs there will be. Oh, or is it gambling for charity, or charity to create more gamblers. Hmmm.
Because whatever it is, gambling is still gambling, with all its sides, including the dangers if there is addiction and uncontrolled gambling activities that will cause various negative effects. Then there is charity, as if to cover up the negative side, which in fact cannot happen either.

Because here, with the existence of a charity gambling program, it means that we are gambling and all the results are donated. Right? Then if so, then maybe there will be manipulation for victory, but after that, when it is no longer in the charity program, it will return to normal. Isn't that actually more attractive for people to gamble with the existence of a charity program? This will definitely always have pros and cons, pluses and minuses.

[AliMan]

When it comes to charity, it's a good advocate for those less fortunate individuals but through gambling? It's somehow a different story. Not all people have the same perspective, and it might lingers different opinions. However, the intention and goals is good but still it comes from gambling. Though there's no bad omen about getting funds generated from gambling, that always depend on a person who performs the actions behind that program.

[Sanitough]

When it comes to charity, it's a good advocate for those less fortunate individuals but through gambling? It's somehow a different story. Not all people have the same perspective, and it might lingers different opinions. However, the intention and goals is good but still it comes from gambling. Though there's no bad omen about getting funds generated from gambling, that always depend on a person who performs the actions behind that program.

People always have a choice, either they bet on a lottery and hope for a return or just donate directly to charitable institutions. But this seems more like a tradition now, especially since it’s not the only lottery with a charity purpose. Many countries have similar setups.

The key factor here is whether the country supports gambling or its teachings. And its no secret to all of us here that in some Muslim-majority countries, gambling is considered a sin, so even if it’s for a good cause, it’s still forbidden. That’s the big difference, it’s not just about purpose but also cultural and religious beliefs.

[EarnOnVictor]

Have you heard of Charity gambling?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charity_gambling

What's your thoughts on this?

Oh yes, I've heard about charity gambling just like charity trading, there is nothing people will not do in the name of charity these days. Well, it's not bad at all in my opinion if the organizers can be true to their words, but I discover that many of them are just looking for opportunities to enrich their pockets and NGOs are commonly doing this. But some will surely be genuine so if I even see that happening, I can participate to help the course of the charity. This may look somehow since gambling is involved but we should look at that as a way to have fun by gambling our money and still donate the loss to a good course.

[Botnake]

It’s still a form of promoting gambling, even if the intention is good. It’s similar to the state-sponsored lottery in our country, where the goal is to help the poor, but not all the proceeds actually go to them. “Charity gambling” sounds nice, but if the funds are coming mostly from the poor, since most bettors in these games are from low-income groups...it feels like it could create more problems. Honestly, combining gambling and charity just doesn’t sit well with me. Just my two cents.

Even though it is like a lottery, is the poor actually helped? What I see is that the poor are not helped, they cannot even reach them, everything ends before it is over. I have seen that it is like a state-sponsored lottery to help the poor, but it does not help the poor, it is only run to help them in name, but later the poor do not get any help from it.

Again, where the poor win the game and bet to get a good amount of money, but here it is seen that many poor people bet like this, from here only 1-2 people win, after winning, it is seen that one winner gets the difference between all the poor. I do not like this because with the money of the poor, other poor people are getting it. How do you see this, I think this is not reasonable or self-sufficient.

The help doesn’t come from people winning the lottery, it’s obvious how hard it is to win. Out of millions of bettors, only one or two might win, and sometimes, no one wins at all on a given day. The help I’m referring to is in how the government uses the funds they generate from the lottery. That’s why it’s called “charity,” as the money goes toward paying hospital bills, buying medicine for those in need, and supporting other programs that benefit the poor.

Just to clarify, it does help some people, not all as the funds are limited, assuming they’re used properly.

[Hirose UK]

Have you heard of Charity gambling?

Well can we call it a free will donation to the charity Is that what it means it context?
This type of gambling is cool but partial they are still promoting gambling which is actually risky to the society, Even though there are benefits attached to it. Usually I am not used to such gambling before but I know it would help the less privilege or the needy.

From what I know, usually the management or organizer will donate some of the profits voluntarily to charity, but I don't know if the context here is the same or if there is different meaning.
And it is true that there is risk that may be felt quite significantly in society with everything that is promoted because this is gambling and we all know that gambling has various impacts such as addiction or even worse, but it needs to be underlined that every activity, even positive ones must have its own bad side.

[stomachgrowls]

It’s still a form of promoting gambling, even if the intention is good. It’s similar to the state-sponsored lottery in our country, where the goal is to help the poor, but not all the proceeds actually go to them. “Charity gambling” sounds nice, but if the funds are coming mostly from the poor, since most bettors in these games are from low-income groups...it feels like it could create more problems. Honestly, combining gambling and charity just doesn’t sit well with me. Just my two cents.

Even though it is like a lottery, is the poor actually helped? What I see is that the poor are not helped, they cannot even reach them, everything ends before it is over. I have seen that it is like a state-sponsored lottery to help the poor, but it does not help the poor, it is only run to help them in name, but later the poor do not get any help from it.

Again, where the poor win the game and bet to get a good amount of money, but here it is seen that many poor people bet like this, from here only 1-2 people win, after winning, it is seen that one winner gets the difference between all the poor. I do not like this because with the money of the poor, other poor people are getting it. How do you see this, I think this is not reasonable or self-sufficient.

The help doesn’t come from people winning the lottery, it’s obvious how hard it is to win. Out of millions of bettors, only one or two might win, and sometimes, no one wins at all on a given day. The help I’m referring to is in how the government uses the funds they generate from the lottery. That’s why it’s called “charity,” as the money goes toward paying hospital bills, buying medicine for those in need, and supporting other programs that benefit the poor.

Just to clarify, it does help some people, not all as the funds are limited, assuming they’re used properly.

A good gesture or kind of system as long these funds would really be that used on the right way and not would really be corrupted into its officials. The bad thing on here is that not all would really be that having that kind of sincerity when it comes into its citizens on which there would really be those officials who would really be that making use of those funds into other aspect or manner. One of the things that makes it interesting is that people do have that chance for them to changed up their lives on the  time or moment that they will be having that kind of hitting up the jackpot. This is why numbers or jackpot amount becomes that bigger on fast manner because of the interest of its citizens on joining up these lotteries on which are known to be also used to be in charity or making it at least having that helping out to those who are in need.

Just like been said that as long it would reall be used properly then there's no issue when it comes to this. It will really be that understandable that there's no way on knowing about transactions be made with those amounts whether its been applied on the right way or totally goes into their own pockets on which it is really that a sad reality. We do know that there are really those government officials who would really be that too corrupt and doesnt mind about their citizens conditions and being really just that too greedy and made themselves make use of those funds.

[Mia Chloe]

I don't see it as a bad idea at all, because the money will help some people at that moment and it's cool. I don't see how this action helps to promote gambling because it is controlled and however, without this, gambling addicts will always be out there since there are other casinos out there that will always influence gambling addiction, because they are doing it for big profits and not for charity. Gambling is part of human nature and and you cannot stop it, or those people involved in this charity gambling, is it their first time to gamble.

Gambling is a choice and as a result you actually can't justify why a person gambles since it's his personal choice as long as the person doesn't practice bad gambling habits and turn out to be a gambling addict. Similarly I actually don't fancy the idea of someone trying to justify the money spent by someone else because of the fact that they earned them from a bet or a gambling activity generally.

The fact is for something that has advantages , so does it come with disadvantages and some of the advantages of this are fund raising and more like a regulated gambling environment. However some disadvantages is that it could actually put some persons into gambling addiction especially those that easily generate bad habits in a relatively short period of time.

[Fiatless]

From what I know, usually the management or organizer will donate some of the profits voluntarily to charity, but I don't know if the context here is the same or if there is different meaning.
And it is true that there is risk that may be felt quite significantly in society with everything that is promoted because this is gambling and we all know that gambling has various impacts such as addiction or even worse, but it needs to be underlined that every activity, even positive ones must have its own bad side.

From the few I have attended, it was the non-profit organization that organized the gambling activities to raise funds to support flood victims. Some of the games that were offered were simple and there were no minimum deposits. The activity also served as a fundraising event where wealthy people were also invited to make donations. The rich people also buy tickets for huge amounts and donate their wins to charity. My only challenge is that underage gambling might be encouraged since there are usually no age limits to the games. But I am sure that adults are already aware that it is merely an exercise to support those who are in need in the community.     

[SamReomo]

at first, they are just supporting the cause but sooner or later they are intending to play and win which mostly turned against them and lead them to lose a lot.

That's the reality, and even the cause is good but many of the winners will still get interested in gambling and if they aren't properly aware about gambling responsibility or about status of good casinos then they'll most probably end up losing money.

[TheUltraElite]

Charity organizations are often corrupt to the entire core. The intent is fine but using that intent to get money from people who are willing to donate their money is not correct.

So gambling just as a show to give the money, just adds in another unnecessary layer before donation. I guess the real motive is to get addicted rich gamblers to spend a fortune there and essentially rob their funds, although that sounds very wrong.

I would never donate to a charity, rather attempt to support a person in need directly with cash or kind.

[Mpamaegbu]

~

~snipped~

You say this because you will never donate money, no matter how "right" you may seem now, unfortunately.

😂😂, I don't know if you referred to me or Ambatman there but whoever you did, it actually brought a grin on my face. Anyway, that's not true. I'm a cheerful giver but I don't just throw it around like it's going out of fashion. It has to be on something I agree with, not just on anything. I see that charity gambling as a smokescreen or something like pulling a wool over someone's eyes. It's just a format whose main purpose is to onboard new users without being open to admitting it. That's my point.

Imagine: one big prize is being raffled off, and one person will win it—well, at worst several people—and all the rest of the money will not be spent in vain. Do you get it?

Coincidentally, I had a similar discussion on this two days ago with a friend offline. It's a common practice in my locality where individuals hawk raffles and interested parties pay a token to challenge their luck to win big. For me, I see it as someone trying to reap where they didn't sow. I can't imagine someone paying as little as $0.10 and then expecting to win goods worth over $70. My friend insisted he had been winning and claiming on that.

[Koadharber]

at first, they are just supporting the cause but sooner or later they are intending to play and win which mostly turned against them and lead them to lose a lot.

That's the reality, and even the cause is good but many of the winners will still get interested in gambling and if they aren't properly aware about gambling responsibility or about status of good casinos then they'll most probably end up losing money.

There are lots of stories which those lottery winners do end up on becoming a poor once again or after they have spend out their winnings back again into lottery or gambling or any other things.
They will really be just that making those kind of realizations on the time or moment that they will really be experiencing tough situations and not on the moment or time that they will really be still having the money.
They do really that become that too confident that they have tons of money and spending up like a mad man until they would be losing it all and on the moment that they've seen their money is already that
low or few then this is where they would be starting to panic and making out those tracing on where those funds or winnings go. It is really just that waste of opportunity with these winners that having this kind of mentality.

[Furious 7]

I'm confused to say that this is a good thing or a bad thing

On the one hand, we know that in the end charity is a very positive step and it is clearly a good action because there will definitely be many people who are helped by the Charity that is done but in the end when this is associated with gambling, the good intentions of Charity are actually not in line with the steps to raise funds that are taken for me.
Gambling is still gambling even though in some countries it is still legal but in reality there are still many pros and cons in terms of gambling, especially this also seems to accommodate players to become addicted to gambling for good reasons, namely Charity.
Indirectly this reminds me of the Robinhood story even though the intentions are good but the method is still not right for me.

Same here in our country on which we do have that sweepstakes on which this is really that being tied up into a charity on which it is really indeed a good gesture or something that really talks about having that help into poor people for whatever those bettors on lotteries will really be making into or some sort of indirect way on paying up some taxes and having that catch on trying out to win up something that could changed up their entire lives. The main issue on here is that people or the citizens do really have some doubt on the fairness on how they do took up those draws on which they are really that believing that the ones who do win up those jackpots are into those who are that their own employees and this had become a known issue for most people. It is really that indeed that not proven out but if the people do have those kind of
assumptions then this could really be that true.

A fact that cannot be forgotten in this case is the gambling that is done. Charity is indeed a good step to take because after all if Charity is done correctly then we certainly know that there are many benefits in it.

But doing this and juxtaposing it with gambling even though the intention is good but in the end I think there will definitely be a lot of pros and cons in this case.
Some will be supporters because indeed their focus is on the Charity but of course there will be many who oppose this too because especially for now gambling is still synonymous with negativity among people today even in some countries gambling directly and shown to the public is a taboo.

So in the end in this case I think it will be a little difficult when saying that this is a positive or negative thing because everyone has their own perspective on this.

[Distinctin]

When it comes to charity, it's a good advocate for those less fortunate individuals but through gambling? It's somehow a different story. Not all people have the same perspective, and it might lingers different opinions. However, the intention and goals is good but still it comes from gambling. Though there's no bad omen about getting funds generated from gambling, that always depend on a person who performs the actions behind that program.

We all know gambling can easily attract people and put on their bets most especially if it comes with varieties of games, plus bonuses that will draw more people into gambling. That’s probably the reason why gambling for a charity cause exists in the market. The point here is whether you win or lose, you end up helping less fortunate people and lessen their life’s struggles.

Furthermore, since the people around particularly those gamblers are fully supportive about this, it’s not surprising why this kind of activity succeed in the market. The key here is you just have to gamble responsibly, bet on what you can afford to lose so you won’t go home with an empty pocket.

[sompitonov]

Charity organizations are often corrupt to the entire core. The intent is fine but using that intent to get money from people who are willing to donate their money is not correct.

So gambling just as a show to give the money, just adds in another unnecessary layer before donation. I guess the real motive is to get addicted rich gamblers to spend a fortune there and essentially rob their funds, although that sounds very wrong.

I would never donate to a charity, rather attempt to support a person in need directly with cash or kind.

My thoughts are exactly the same as yours, so I will never donate unless I am convinced and check all the fine points of what exactly and how the money is collected, as well as how many layers it has between me and the final recipient. If there is an opportunity, I would rather go myself and hand over the necessary amount to the person who needs it, this is the best solution, but it is a pity that this can be done very rarely and basically many are out of our reach or it requires too much effort and expense to do it.

I have heard many times how people are deceived in this way, and what I know for sure is that I do not want to reward scammers who the next day will come up with a new story in order to get money under the guise of a pitiful story.

[hyudien]

Charity organizations are often corrupt to the entire core. The intent is fine but using that intent to get money from people who are willing to donate their money is not correct.

So gambling just as a show to give the money, just adds in another unnecessary layer before donation. I guess the real motive is to get addicted rich gamblers to spend a fortune there and essentially rob their funds, although that sounds very wrong.

I would never donate to a charity, rather attempt to support a person in need directly with cash or kind.

Yes, it is a good decision and I think giving it directly is much better, because we can see it directly. Even though we have to donate to charity, we must first see whether the charity is very trustworthy or not, because there are so many irresponsible people who claim to be charities, but in reality it is for their own interests. And if it is associated with gambling, I also think this is not the best choice to make, I mean if you want to do good then there is a better way. I don't want to say this is bad because the intention is good, but among the many choices who prefer other choices.