262
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2025
262 points (100.0% liked)
Mildly Infuriating
42329 readers
7 users here now
Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.
I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!
It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
7. Content should match the theme of this community.
-Content should be Mildly infuriating.
-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.
...
8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.
-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.
...
...
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Before everyone piles on, it's probably worth understanding the context.
Yes, this was a daft idea, doomed to generate outrage, and outrage is an appropriate response.
However, as the article says, this non-profit was insolvent. This type of non-profit is not flying a CEO around in a private jet. Their entire budget for the year was $400k. Enough for rent, several staff, snacks and art supplies for kids.
The budget was very likely prepared by a volunteer, with limited skills and experience.
It's often also unclear what an organisation's total debts are. It's not at all uncommon to realise an error has been made in understanding an award or something and suddenly the centre owes 5 years back pay for underpaid over time or some such.
Suddenly the centre is insolvent and is required by law to cease it's activities.
At this point someone has had the misguided notion that the problem can be fixed by coercing parents to contribute towards the debts.
Explaining the problem to parents and asking for donations would've been fine, but obviously they wouldn't have received $40k in donations so it would've been unsuccessful.
Tying the request to the kids "art" is just poor taste all the way up and down.
So yeah, it's offensive, but it's not nefarious, and while it's really daft I can at least understand how it happened.
I did particularly like this:
Saying that in an indignant Australian accent makes it feel like it came straight out of some antipodean cringe-humor sitcom (FYI "Fisk" is pretty good!).
Maybe but it sounds like the current management committee inherited the problem. I'm dealing with that right now.
I certainly didn't mean to imply they're actually incorrect, just that presumably working to fix it was part of their mandate, and the frank admission that they didn't magically fix everything is kinda darkly funny.
Oh me neither. My wife liked Fisk I should give it a watch
To add to that, it's in Australia and AU$2200 is about U$1500 / £1100 / €1250.
Average full time weekly wage is about $1,700 AUD before tax.
Amazing.
And due to higher living expenses we end up with less disposable income than Americans.
Considering how little disposable income most Americans I know have, you must be truly fucked.
So it was a fundraiser? Hm, I actually don't have a problem with that and I think it's a nicer (more creative if you will) option than - idk, simply asking for money.
I work in this area and underfunding is a constant companion. Add to that the abysmally low pay and the disregard for all the extra work educators do, I get positively pissed off that they get in trouble for trying to fix a bad situation. Probably, as you said, brought up as unpaid labor by someone who had no nefarious thought at all about the whole thing, just wanted to help. Apparently they were unaware of rules and regulations, is the worst I can say here.
Did parents step up and donate money anyhow? That is the real question.
Yeah. I feel like a little bit of finesse could've averted this disaster.
$40k debts is pretty manageable. If that's owed to the ATO for example, as soon as you get a payment arrangement (easy to obtain) then you're no longer "insolvent". Pay it off over 2 years, so you get 3x of this type of fundraiser.
Given the staff "walk out", it's possible that the money is owed to employees, which muddies the waters.
Instead of saying "everyone has to pay $2,200", they should have said...
It's still a long shot, but it's a better chance than trying to guilt every parent into paying $2,200.
Possibly. From experience, I can almost guarantee you that there's way more drama behind the story than the numbers show.
That's the read I got from the article too, but again I'm pretty sure the whole thing had a long prelude that also involved parents, so it didn't exactly come as a shock.
Yeah. Nothing like solvency issues to drag out a bit of drama is there.
Sadly, everyone involved in this fiasco is at best underpaid but more likely a volunteer.
That's only half of what I meant. Working with children & their parents, it tends to get very emotional. Or maybe I didn't get your phrasing; I'm not a native speaker.
Underpaid for sure.