Tag: charity

2122: EXTRA LIFE: 24 Hours in Eorzea - Tonight from 8pm UK Time

0122_001

A somewhat different post to usual today in that I'm promoting something I'm doing later rather than just writing about what's been happening today.

I've been meaning to participate in the Extra Life gaming marathon for the past few years, but for various reasons have never quite got around to it. Finding myself with a free 24 hours or so, though, I've decided to spend 24 continuous(ish) hours playing Final Fantasy XIV in an attempt to 1) raise some money for Children's Miracle Network Hospitals and 2) thoroughly explore both the new patch 3.1 content and aspects of the game I haven't delved into too much as yet.

From my Extra Life page, where you can donate:

Hi everyone!

While the world is busy with Fallout 4 and Call of Duty Black Ops III, I continue my life's work of yammering on about Final Fantasy XIV until people give it a try just to shut me up.

This year's Extra Life conveniently falls around the first major content patch for Heavensward, which means there will be lots of exciting new stuff to explore, including the Extreme-level version of the Thordan boss fight, airship exploration missions in the Diadem and much more besides. So I figured why not take the opportunity to show what's new in version 3.1 — or perhaps, for some of you, what's new since you last tried the game, or even what this Final Fantasy XIV malarkey is about in the first place — and hopefully raise some money in the process.

I'll be streaming on Twitch between 8pm UK time on Wednesday November 11 and 8pm on Thursday November 12; there may be brief gaps for food, drinks and whatnot, but otherwise I'm aiming for a full 24 hours in Eorzea. Join me!

ABOUT EXTRA LIFE

Children's Miracle Network Hospitals treat thousands of children each year, regardless of their family's ability to pay. These kids are facing scary stuff like cancer, cystic fibrosis, and injuries from accidents to name just a few.

Extra Life is a huge worldwide celebration of the social impact of gamers of all kinds: from video games to board games and tabletop RPGs! Since 2010, Extra Life has raised more than $14 million to help children's hospitals provide critical treatments and healthcare services, pediatric medical equipment, research and charitible care. It's my sincere hope that you'll find it in your heart to support my efforts with a monthly pledge or one-time gift that will go directly to my hospital.

Your donation is tax-deductible and ALL PROCEEDS go to help kids. Donations to me will be aimed at UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital in Oakland, California, since I don't live in the U.S. but my brother John does, and that was the closest hospital to his home!

I need your help to reach my goal For The Kids.  Please make a safe, easy donation online today.  Click the "Support This Participant" button on this page to get started.  Thank you so much for supporting my efforts!

I was originally intending to start streaming around 5pm UK time, but I've pushed this back a little in order to take care of some business in the early evening. I will be fuelling myself with cheap knockoff energy drinks, pasta pots and anything I can convince my wife to cook up for me, and will be appearing on stream both "in character" and via webcam, all being well, assuming I can get said webcam working adequately.

I'd greatly appreciate it if you popped in and checked out my stream for a bit, and if you're feeling particularly generous, slip a few quid to my campaign page. None of the money goes directly to me; it's being aimed directly at UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital in Oakland, California, one of the Children's Miracle Network Hospitals supported by the Extra Life initiative. I know it's not UK-based (because Extra Life is North American) but a good cause is a good cause, regardless of its geographical location, so I hope you'll consider digging deep and showing your support, both for the kids and for my endurance run!

Thanks in advance for your support.

#oneaday Day 930: Conditional Philanthropy

I will never understand people — particularly famous types — who are deliberately obnoxious, and who clearly get off on negative attention, conflict and repeatedly proving what an arse they are.

There are a number of people I can think of who fit into this particular category, but the one who springs most readily and frequently to mind is Piers Morgan, erstwhile editor of the News of the World and the Daily Mirror and presently dripping his own peculiar brand of slime over American television sets thanks to CNN.

Piers Morgan's crimes against common decency are too many to enumerate, but his recent behaviour regarding the Olympics has drawn the ire of a number of people.

For those unaware of what he has been up to, it started here:

And continued:

And continued…

AND CONTINUED…

Morgan, it is fair to say, had something of a bee in his bonnet over the fact that some members of the British Olympic team didn't sing God Save The Queen after winning a medal. He appeared to think that this was incredibly important, and that it was worth putting down their impressive, world-beating sporting achievements for.

Then came the bribery and guilt-tripping:

Generous, non? Well, it could be argued as such, yes — he has no obligation to donate anything to Great Ormond Street children's hospital, after all — but dig a little deeper and this whole thing just becomes a bit sleazy, really. By not donating a proportion of his undoubtedly vast wealth to Great Ormond Street simply because of an athlete not singing the anthem — not taking into account the fact that winning an Olympic event is probably a pretty emotional moment for any sportsperson — Morgan is implying several things: firstly, that his apparent philanthropy is, in fact, conditional, and secondly, that athletes who do not sing the national anthem after winning a Gold medal are somehow child-haters.

The gloating didn't help.

Neither did the inconsistency:

Or the abuse:

Basically, there was just something incredibly distasteful about the whole thing. Morgan was clearly just trolling for responses, and he got them by the bucketload — and yes, I'm aware I'm part of the problem here. We don't even have any guarantee that Morgan is actually going to cough up the £15,000 he currently "owes" Great Ormond Street.

He probably will, of course, because he then gets to look like the hero who donated £15,000 to a children's hospital — and also gets to rub how much money he has in the peanut gallery's faces, of course — but I can't help thinking that it is for entirely the wrong reasons. If he feels that strongly about supporting Great Ormond Street, he should just donate the money, not hold his contributions to ransom based on something completely unrelated — something that could potentially make the non-singing athletes look like child-hating dicks in the hands of an unscrupulous (read: Daily Mail) reporter.

Morgan's not making a point here. He's simply waving his willy around in an attempt to make us all feel bad in one way or another. Don't sing the anthem? You're unpatriotic. Don't have as much money as him? HAHAHA YOU'RE POOR. Criticise Morgan's true motivations for this little exercise? YOU HATE SICK KIDS AND ARE A PIG-IGNORANT VACUOUS LITTLE TROLL.

There are several things that remain a mystery out of this whole thing. 1) Why is Piers Morgan still relevant? 2) Why are there people standing up for him? 3) Why does he have to be so fucking infuriating and get off on all this "controversy" he's stirring up? He's like that school bully who would just shrug off any insults you threw at him then punch you in the face and still, somehow, end up being the most popular kid in the school despite being the very worst kind of odious cretin imaginable.

Fortunately, this being the age of social media, at least one good thing has come out of this whole debacle: this JustGiving page aiming to make up the difference in donations that Morgan has refused to give due to athletes not singing God Save The Queen. It's a lofty goal, but if the world can harness its hate for Piers Morgan to raise £14,000 for sick kids… well, admittedly that's not the best reason in the world to give money to charity, but it's sure better than holding the donations from your own incredibly deep pockets to ransom.

#oneaday, Day 34: #whatstigma?

Comedienne Rebecca Front posted the following tweet yesterday, and was somewhat surprised at the level of response it got:

It was a bold move, particularly for a public figure, but in doing so she inspired a veritable plethora of people to "come out of the closet", as it were, and admit that they had suffered mental health issues, be they depression, anxiety, panic attacks, OCD or any number of others.

Front's aim with the original tweet was to encourage people to talk openly about the things they felt without feeling a stigma attached to it—hence the hashtag. And it was genuinely touching to see the number of people who latched on to this topic, confessing how they suffered from numerous "hidden" ailments in their mind whilst going about what otherwise seemed to be perfectly "normal" lives.

In fact, Front conjectured that some form of mental illness affected almost everyone. That may appear to be an exaggeration, but the number of people responding to her original tweet, coupled with the fact that #whatstigma became the top non-promoted trending topic in the UK for a good few hours yesterday, made it clear that there were plenty of people out there who do suffer from these things and perhaps haven't had the opportunity to talk about them, or don't feel comfortable talking about them.

It's no surprise, really, that there's a perceived stigma surrounding mental illness, however. Back in last May, Janet Street-Porter made some ill-advised comments suggesting that depression was being used as a fashion accessory—that people were just saying they were suffering because it was the "in" ailment to have.

There may well be some people who deliberately exaggerate their feelings of "being down" into "depression"—if there are, then they really should find better things to do with their lives. But these people aside, people do genuinely suffer. And it's not just a case of "snapping out of it", of "cheering up", of saying "chin up" enough times. It doesn't just go away; it sticks around, for years sometimes. Like anything, there are peaks and troughs; the peaks can feel like you've escaped it, finally, that you're in the clear, that you can get on with enjoying your life. But then a trough comes along, plunges you deep into the darkness and the long climb back out begins again.

I've felt this way—I still do. And I know many, many other people—some in person, some via the Internet—who also do. I didn't recognise my depression for what it was until I spent some time with someone who explained it to me at university. I recognised the feelings she described and knew that I'd felt them myself, too. It wasn't just a case of feeling "a bit sad". It was a variety of factors piling up in such a way that made it very difficult to deal with life's trials, whatever they might be.

And I hate it. The feeling of helplessness that comes with it; of having days when you just don't want to get out of bed; of times when nothing can stop you from feeling regrets, anger, fear, shame; of wondering if it'll ever end. For some people, it becomes just something about you—something you deal with. For others, it's an acute condition which can be treated. But for most people, there are underlying causes that need to be dealt with rather than attacked with "quick fixes".

In my case, these underlying causes are well-documented, and I'm doing what I can to fix them. This makes me feel a little better most of the time—knowing that I'm making the effort to do something about these underlying causes is good motivation to keep doing what I do. But there are still days when I find myself wondering if it's worth it, if anything is ever going to come of all these efforts that I'm making.

I won't know unless I keep trying, I guess.

My feelings on this made clear, now, here's the shameless plugging. In May, I'll be running the BUPA 10K with a couple of very lovely friends I've met via the One A Day Project. All three of us will be running in aid of the mental health charity "Mind". I'd certainly appreciate it a great deal if you can spare a bit of virtual loose change to fling my way via my fundraising page. Every little bit will help people to get the help they need to overcome these difficulties.

Thanks for reading this; thanks for your help; and thanks for your support.

#oneaday, Day 345: Leader of Men

I've never seen myself as the "leader" type. I follow orders well, but when I'm asked to take charge of something, I find myself thinking whether or not I'm "qualified" to make those decisions, particularly if they're on behalf of other people. Now, I'm a qualified teacher, so in the most literal sense of the term I am qualified to make decisions on behalf of other people. But if you're the sort of person who suffers a bit from self-doubt or a lack of self-confidence, then it's difficult to make yourself get into a position to "lead" others.

Which is why I've kind of surprised myself with stepping up to the plate for next year's One A Day Project. And also why I'm even more surprised that people—some of whom I don't even know directly (yet)—appear to be flocking to the cause. Apparently either my word carries some degree of influence, or people think it's actually a good idea.

I think it's a good idea. Yes, some may argue that the more relaxed rules of next year aren't strictly "one a day" in the most literal sense. And to that I say, "I agree". But it's a compromise. Those who do want to go the whole hog and commit to a post every day, I applaud you. (And yes, I am applauding myself right now.) Those who don't feel they can commit to a post every single day, that's absolutely fine too. Personally, while I am a fan of writing something every day and believe that both I and this blog have got something out of it, it's not for everyone, depending on work, family commitments and all manner of other things. So it makes sense to relax the rules a bit in order to allow as many people as possible to participate.

And that, I guess, is what heading up some sort of project is all about—listening to a variety of viewpoints, weighing up the pros and cons and coming to some sort of compromise that makes as many people as possible happy.

I'm really pleased with the amount of interest people have shown in the new project so far, and I promise I won't keep banging on about it over here too much. But I thought I'd just share the fact that we're up to 24 participants (with a few more sign-ups in my inbox that I'll be putting on the site once I've flown back from the US to the UK… boo) and we have had our first monetary donation to Cancer Research. We've also earned 153 minutes of crisis and suicide prevention services on behalf of To Write Love On Her Arms via ad clickthroughs.

It may not sound like a lot until you consider the fact that we haven't started yet. (Those of us who are starting on January 1st, that is.) Hopefully once everyone starts contributing, there'll be a wealth of content for people to enjoy, and said people will be happy to contribute their time or their money to the charities we're supporting to show their appreciation.

So yes; I know that "#oneaday" doesn't mean one a day next year. But that's fine; it's going to bring a bunch of people together to do something awesome. And it feels pretty good to be an important part of that.

#oneaday, Day 339: Looking Forward

Okay. I'm going to go ahead and make this pledge now, since I've been farting around with it for the whole day and don't want all that work to go to waste.

I will be continuing with daily blogging next year, whether you (yes, YOU) like it or not.

However, a couple of people pointed out that it's worth putting some kind of "incentive" in place for those who want to take part. I'm not talking about monetary gain for the participants (though if you want to fling a few quid and/or Steam/GOG games my way in appreciation for my hard work, I certainly wouldn't say no) — rather, as the fine, gorgeous and well-endowed Mr Daniel Lipscombe suggested, we should get sponsored. For charity, like.

With that in mind, I've set up a few things today. The first is this. I envisage this page being a central hub for our collective, where we can post all of our entries together and end up with a delicious archive of everything we've done together. This can also double as a jumping-off point for people to visit our individual sites, and contains the all-important donation buttons. I took an executive decision and signed up to benefit Cancer Research UK via JustGiving, and To Write Love On Her Arms via SocialVibe. Most people out there know someone or have been personally affected by cancer, so that seemed like a safe option. To Write Love On Her Arms is an organisation which helps those with depression, anxiety, crises and suicidal thoughts. Being someone who has suffered considerably with depression for many years now, this particular group held some personal resonance for me, and it's one of the more popular options to support via SocialVibe.

Here's what I need anyone reading this to do, and it's very simple:

Tell people. Get them to follow us on Twitter. Like us on Facebook. Read the updates on the blog. And, for those who are interested in joining the party, signing up on this page.

Once things are up and running, I can co-ordinate everyone's work (and by that, I mean post their entries onto the Project's main page, not hassle people if they don't have time to write something) and we can all work on promoting blogging for a good cause.

Sound good? It sounds good to me, and as a co-operative effort I think it will work well. The fact that we're being sponsored for charity will give some people the push to carry on, and despite the name, I figured we can relax the rules on posting frequency a little bit.

By the end of another year, we'll have a huge body of work to look back on with pride and hopefully will have raised at least a little money for a couple of charities that are worth supporting. Plus it's certainly a more proactive approach than simply changing your bloody Facebook avatar.

#oneaday, Day 322: Chinese Whispers

Goodness me. Thank you to everyone who read yesterday's post, including the unprecedented 602 of you who showed up today. Whether or not you agreed with the sentiments therein (and whether or not you were polite about it), thanks for reading.

There have been some interesting developments in the whole thing over the last 24 hours or so. On the whole, the whole thing can actually be said to have had a positive outcome, though not quite through the means the originators of the meme intended.

In fact, the originators of the meme had nothing to do with the NSPCC, as predicted. Fellow blogger, Commodore 64 enthusiast and all-round fine, upstanding gentleman Glen McNamee did a bit of research on the issue and uncovered the fact that the whole thing had actually originated in two separate places in November as a bit of fun, with no charity links whatsoever. Read Glen's blog post about it here.

Dave Gorman also wrote an excellent post on how this sort of thing can undermine genuine fundraising attempts with honourable intentions. Also worth a read.

The interesting thing about all this, though, is the whole "Chinese Whispers" nature of it. By looking at people who had changed their avatar/status throughout the course of the day, you could see the gradual evolution of the whole thing. To start with, it was a "campaign to end child abuse". Then it was a "campaign by the NSPCC to end child abuse". And by the time people like me had written posts on the topic pointing out the flaws in the whole plan, people were taking great pains to explain that as well as changing their avatar, they had, in fact, donated, too. There were also a few people who were up-front about the whole thing and said they changed their avatar purely because they thought the cartoon characters were cool. Fair play to both parties; at least you're being honest. There was also a considerable proportion of people around Facebook who tried to convince everyone that the whole thing was a scam by a bunch of paedophiles aiming to lure children in with cartoon avatars. This last part is bollocks, by the way, in case you were worried.

So on the whole, the whole thing had a positive outcome. It provoked discussion (or rather, argument) and had the net result of shaming at least a few people into tossing a few quid the NSPCC's way, which I'm sure they're very grateful for, though they probably wouldn't have chosen to go about promoting it by people yelling at one another.

The thing is, though, couldn't the whole thing have been resolved without the need for drawn-out arguments in the middle of it? Probably. It's ironic; Web 2.0 is full of narcissism and vanity, but is also a breeding ground for sheep mentality. Some people copy and paste things or blindly follow instructions without considering the implications. Think before you post!

Let's leave it at that. The matter's over and done with. Resolved. Until everyone forgets about it and it happens all over again. When that does happen, just remember that famous and rather offensive comment about arguments on the Internet and the Paralympics.

Also, don't be a dick.

#oneaday, Day 321: Charities Have No Use For Your Avatar

Are you morally-conscious? Feel like you should be doing more to help your fellow man, but feeling a bit strapped for cash at the moment? Don't feel like putting together some sort of fund-raising event because, after all, it is a bit cold outside and it might snow.

Never fear! Web 2.0 is here to allow you to assuage your guilt without any need for financial or time outlay! All you need to do is change your profile picture and/or status to something vaguely related to the charity that you would like to support and that counts as you having Done Your Bit when it comes to Judgement Day. Me? I like the Cats Protection League, so I shall be donning a LOLcats avatar for the day.

Grumble, moan etc. I know. And I have a sneaking suspicion I may have mentioned this before.

The above piece of sarcasm is proudly sponsored by today's Facebook and Twitter campaign to get as many people as possible to change their avatars to their favourite cartoon characters of the 80s or 90s. This, apparently, counts as you "joining the fight against child abuse", and has been attributed to the NSPCC by several people. Go look at the NSPCC front page right now. Do you see any mention of any campaign "not to see a human face on Facebook until Monday, December 6th"?

No. I certainly don't. Probably because it actually has nothing to do with the NSPCC whatsoever, and probably because the NSPCC would rather you got off your arse and either did something to raise money for them or just reached into your pocket and sent them a tenner.

"Donating" your Facebook status or a tweet means nothing. And the "it's just a bit of fun" defence is bollocks, too; there are plenty of people out there who feel like changing their avatar (a task which takes, ooh, a minute at most?) and/or copy-pasting a status is absolutely "doing their bit" and absolves them of any sense of responsibility, putting them on the same level as someone who has diligently, say, organised a sponsored run, bake sale, 48 hour Desert Bus marathon, three-week charity wankathon, whatever. It doesn't.

This isn't a rant saying that everyone should donate to charity. I don't—at the moment I can't afford to. It's up to everyone whether they would like to support a charity that deals with an issue they feel strongly about. But "supporting" that charity means just that—supporting them and the work that they do. That means giving them some money, or some of your time, or just walking into one of their shops and buying a dodgy velvet jacket for a 70s night or something.

It doesn't mean changing your fucking avatar. How many people out there copy-pasted that status and changed their avatar and then felt all smug and self-righteous before going on to do other things, forgetting all about the fact that they hadn't actually donated any money to the charity in question, who probably had nothing to do with the campaign in the first place?

So don't let me stop you changing your avatars to your favourite cartoon characters. If you do, though, at least be honest about why you're doing so—perhaps you think Superted is awesome, in which case, say so and don't hide behind some kind of false altruism—or actually follow up what you're doing with a donation.

Rant over.

Actually, no it's not.

Girls, next time you feel tempted to post something that the "men won't get" in an attempt to "promote breast cancer awareness", realise that we all know what you're doing and would again much rather you just donate to a worthy cause like MacMillan, rather than supposedly "raising awareness" by being deliberately obtuse. How the fuck does that even work?

Rant over. For reals, yo. Take care of yourself. And each other.

One A Day, Day 43: Synaesthetic

Played a bit of Chime tonight. This is a game I picked up from XBLA a little while back but it got sort of lost in the midst of Mass Effect 2's marvellousness. I took the time to go back and play through the other levels in it tonight and wouldn't you know it? It's great.

If you're not familiar with Chime, it's "that charity game", where 60% of the game's royalties go to the OneBigGame cause, who in turn pass it on to Save the Children and the Children's Starlight Foundation. And it's only 400 points, which is not bad at all, especially considering it's actually a good game, too.

It's a puzzle game that initially appears to be very much like Lumines. You have a grid with a beat bar moving across it, there's various shapes of increasing awkwardness thrust into your hands along with a hypnotic, minimalist, reactive soundtrack. It's there the similarities end, though, as in Chime you're not dropping things in a Tetris style, rather you're sticking them wherever you like on the grid in an attempt to produce "quads" – rectangles and squares of at least 3×3 in size. When you create a quad, it gradually fills with colour and while it's doing this, you can stick further shapes to it to make it bigger. Once it's full, it becomes locked in place and will only disappear once the beat bar passes over it. When it disappears, it leaves a mark on the grid, and it's your eventual aim to cover as much of the grid as possible in this manner.

That's it. As all good puzzle games should be, it's simple but addictive. Where Chime really shines, though, is in how the gameplay shapes the music. Where you put the shapes on the grid, coupled with how large the quads you produce are, affects the music. As time progresses, the basic backing of the music goes through its structure, but various melodic passages, stings and samples are triggered by the things you have stuck to the grid. All of it is completely seamless, too, meaning that there's none of the "forced" sound that Lumines sometimes has.

One of the nicest things about Chime is that you can just use it as a musical toy, too. The game's "Free" mode allows you to simply place shapes and create quads without a time limit pressuring you to cover as much as possible, and the game's six tracks are all very different from one another, ranging from the artsy end of things with a Philip Glass track, through Moby, one of the guys from Orbital and one of the guys from Lemon Jelly, among others. Six tracks may not sound like much, but the replay value offered by the different "mixes" that your gameplay will produce makes them more than enough. Plus, for 400 points you really can't complain too much.

I've been fascinated by synaesthetic (if that's even a word) games ever since I first played Rez on the Dreamcast, and Chime is a more than worthy addition to that canon.