Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I have no opinion on Mr Beast, as I only vaguely know who he is, but to me, acts of charity don't belong in public spaces like this. If you are doing something to be kind, it seems you should be doing it discretely. Broadcasting someone else's personal problems to the world and showing how generous you are both seem to go against it being a selfless act. The goal seems to be the attention and profit when it is put on display, as if benefits to the outside party no longer is the only motivation for doing these things. The person receiving the "benefit" is now part of a transactional situation in which their dignity is being traded for publicity of the "giver."
I don't blame the person in need receiving their slice of the benefits, but I also no longer need to feel the giver is owed positive karma, as it has become a profitable transaction for both sides instead of an act of generosity. There's no more goodwill there than someone who sells a used car. Someone that needs transportation has gotten it, but only because a mutual agreement for the exchange was made. It's not like the person gave the other person the car because they needed help.
The money has to come from somewhere. I imagine the more famous he is, the more sponcers he can get, the more money he can pull in, the more money he can give out.
Or maybe I'm wrong. I'm not that educated on the subject, but thats my take. Not my cup of tea, but good for him helping everybody.
My kids have watched Mr Beast, so I'm familiar, and I'm not really a fan, but if his fame gives him more money to hand out tomorrow, and even more to hand out the day after that, I'd rather those views and ad revenue go to the guy who will pass it around than someone who hoards it away.
Fair enough. He's doing something positive, regardless of why possible reason why, so that's still something good.
It's not my way of doing things, but it doesn't need to be. If he was doing anything bad, I'm sure the rumor mill would have it plastered everywhere by now, as big as he is.