I agree to Idea keep funding share
Voting Disabled

232 votes

I disagree to Idea keep funding share

Rank 19

Idea#287

This idea is active.
Homelessness »

keep funding share

it is very important to our community that you continue to fund share. I am greived that folks choose to put so much energy into such negativity about a program that is working to improve the lives of members of our community who are often ignored.

Submitted by 4 years ago

Comments (15)

  1. Please take time to read the Declaration of a State of Emergency in 2010 by and for homeless people.

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  2. I see a SHARE supporter has hacked ideascale on Oct 9 and deleted every single entry that was critical of SHARE, including the one that had over 100 comments from many members of the community with a variety of opinions.

    Is this how you roll, SHARE? Shutting down any public debate that you don't like? What a cowardly act.

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  3. I see a SHARE supporter has now voted over 150 times in the last couple of hours to artificially inflate the support. Tell me SHARE - do you also inflate your statistics and game the data when you report them to the city council, too?

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  4. SHARE as an organization courts controversy, and has for years. Its financial bookkeeping is far from transparent, it does not keep data about its clients, and it has a very long history of angering its neighbors with its tactics. It currently operates with very little oversight, and for the last two years has bypassed nearly all public process to work in stealth mode with churches, which have a shield law in WA state. This is an extremely poor model for our shelter system, and is extremely vulnerable to corruption and exploitation. Our homeless deserve better.

    I fully agree that we need to continue to fund the emergency shelter system. But SHARE is the wrong group to manage it. The city's money and shelter management needs to either be turned over to a responsible group whose sole function is to run these shelters, or they need to make this a city-run service, rather than contracting it out.

    SHARE would still be able to maintain its activist goals, but would need to rely on private donations to do so, like every other activist group should. It is a conflict of interest to be taking city money to run shelters while also organizing protests and lobbying for permanent shantytowns.

    Are you listening, city council?

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  5. Note to everyone reading this: On Oct 9, a SHARE supporter hacked into IdeaScale and deleted every submitted idea that was critical of SHARE. When the IT staff reinstated the deleted items, SHARE supporters then voted hundreds of times in the space of a couple of hours to artificially inflate pro-SHARE ideas, and artificially deflate those critical of this organization.

    The ranking of any idea related to homelessness is completely suspect at this point, due to this manipulation of the data. Please keep this in mind as you review these ideas, and focus on the comments more than the ranking.

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  6. Correction: The coordinators of this website are not stupid and irresponsible and are fully capable of determining site abuse. As soon as it was discovered that the site was being abused by a small group of ANTI-Share members, the situation was immediately remedied. That's why their material was removed so quickly and efficiently.

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  7. The reason the numbers went up so quickly in support of SHARE is because the abuse of anti-share "voters" was remedied by IdeaScale coordinators.

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  8. The current numbers are provably NOT correct.

    Several ideas were submitted after the SHARE supporter deleted everything critical of SHARE, so they had no prior history. After the original ideas were restored, the new ideas critical of SHARE ranking also went down at the same time and by the same number of votes as the original ones, while proSHARE ideas submitted before and after the deletions went up by the same amount as well. Someone clearly went through after the restoration and voted hundreds of times to fake the results.

    This means the rankings you see right now were not reinstated by the IT department, but were manipulated after the restoration by supporters of SHARE.

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  9. The poster above is correct - comments that were added after SHARE supporters hacked the system were manipulated by the same amount of votes as those that were restored. If IT had been able to remove fake votes (which I doubt they can without registration; IP address is not enough), the numbers would be different.

    SHARE supporters obviously manipulated the voting on this site.

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  10. Humanity efforts on our own home-front are not made subject to challenge simply because of a strained budget. If personal greed overrules compassion for the needy God help us all. Was the nation in an uproar when we rendered aid to Katrina's homeless? Was it not because the aid was delayed? Why would it be different for Washington's own homeless who are needy because of economical catastrophe?

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  11. Share has been doing a lot for the homeless by accomodating them as much as it could, therefore some people are trying to misinform the public by expressing a lot of negative idea against such humanitarian institution. wITHOUT the existence of Share, the city would have had more problems in her hands with the homeless situation, so Share should be funded as much as it need.

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  12. Share does an amazing job of running their own shelter systems with with high accountability and transparency. Share members take care of themselves and each other. The community manages itself and has great support from a wide range of faith groups, businesses, individuals, and schools. Who would object to homeless people taking care of themselves when there are not enough supports out there? The biggest secret is that Share raises over $150,000 each year from other donors, just like other nonprofits do! Share does so much more with less. Keep Funding SHARE!

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  13. The voting is rigged, people

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  14. Share, overall, is a great program for people in need of shelter. The organization does alot to help homeless get to their shelter, alot of which are provided by our own community churches. Not only a roof over their head, but cleanliness is a factor as well. Showers are provided by Share and other organizations such as Urban Rest Stop. Without such groups that care, we would have a serious problem. However, in my integrity, I cannot say Share performs perfectly, or the organization could not improve. As a former participant of Share, I cannot help but express the serious lack of efficiency within Share. It seemed to me that the interior workings of Share were similar to mob-style dealings with the public, in which they bombard with demands, rather than thanking. It is this hostile way of receiving monies from the city, that I lean one way more than the other.

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  15. SHARE is an incompletely organized organization that (somehow) organized itself to be selforganizing and, thereby, purposefully operates itself more econimically efficient than similiarly situated organized oranizations. Brillant!

    4 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed

Vote Activity Show

(latest 20 votes)