For causes like this the only thing that counts is that you ultimately change something in the world for the better.
Thanks Bober. That how we expect to create value for the members and token holders. By making a small change at a time, even if small, even if we can't change the world, we still can make a difference for a lot of people and topics.
Changing a small piece of the world means changing the world as it is not anymore what is had been before the change. The issue for me is that token holders shouldn't be top priority in charity. It is firstly about the causes you want to support.
Token holders which we like to call Members, bring new perspectives. For example just for illustration, if enough members live in an area affected by Dengue fever, which takes thousands of casualties per year in Asia, a virus than most westerners never heard about, then enough "token holders" from those areas, can create a movement in Philanthor's swarm to support research for a cure.
There is a start up if I remember that correctly that presents specific research causes (for example like the Dengue fever) and then anybody can contribute to support research. Sure why not have more than one project going this way, but do you expect a lot of parties in this network to be rather interested in personal profits than in supporting good causes?
We can't prevent or anticipate people's intention. We think that most donors and philanthropists don't like to mix profits with donations, as it takes away the altruistic motive. However if one wants to enjoy both worlds, we aren't here to judge or prevent it.
You are basically right about that, but the problem is how do you know that someone joining your network is a philanthropist?
By joining our network he becomes a philanthorpist.
I would disagree with this statement. Joining your network doesn't necessarily make you a philanthropist. I think there is more to that.