The issue isn’t one of fitting several goals in one pledge. If you take the current GWWC pledge to literally require supporting interventions in developing countries, then that’s not something that a cause-agnostic donor should be willing to agree to early in their life, even if they currently think that interventions in developing countries are most promising.
Which cause you support should be open to change as you learn and as the available opportunities change.
If you take the current GWWC pledge to literally require supporting interventions in developing countries, then that’s not something that a cause-agnostic donor should be willing to agree to early in their life
I guess that in this community we have people who think that they will live a long time. They might think of “early in life” as 200 years.
The issue isn’t one of fitting several goals in one pledge. If you take the current GWWC pledge to literally require supporting interventions in developing countries, then that’s not something that a cause-agnostic donor should be willing to agree to early in their life, even if they currently think that interventions in developing countries are most promising.
Which cause you support should be open to change as you learn and as the available opportunities change.
This is in large part the reason I didn’t take the pledge.
Does that mean that the change in pledge would prompt you to join, Larks?
Nope, sorry.
edit: but I think my personal requirements are sufficiently idiosyncratic that it’s not worthwhile taking them into account.
I guess that in this community we have people who think that they will live a long time. They might think of “early in life” as 200 years.