I didn't realise that you'd actually cashed the cheque until I read this post. Still, I thought I would be up to speed with things once I had read it. You started your post with the subject line, "THIS is why I cashed the check!", so I thought you would explain. And yet the whole message is about a letter you received from the State of Connecticut Attorney General's Office demanding that you take down a "press release" from "your" website. There was no demand in the letter for you to cash the cheque.

You say, "I correctly assumed there would be trouble if we left the donation and I was correct." However, you seem to have misunderstood the situation. The complaint you received was about content on Lindsay's website. It had nothing to do with your leaving or not leaving the donation. What happens to the money has no effect whatsoever on the existence of the content on Lindsay's website, which is all that the complaint was about.

So, as far as I can see, your post doesn't clarify in any way why you cashed the cheque. Please could you spell it out for me?

Read the letter again. No, it is not an overt demand, but there is a subtle "suggestion" that I do so there, and they have made it very clear that they would not count the money as income, so it was pointless to leave the check uncashed anyway. Furthermore, I cashed the check because I felt that, if there was any trouble (as there inevitably was), it would be apparent to StC and their lawyers that I was defying their claim of rejecting the money, and since Lindsay's site seems to claim as much, I did not want to willingly be an accomplice to that. I KNEW they would find any legal means they could of screwing me if I didn't step up and do the right thing once it became clear to me that they were just not going to accept the donation. So I took a pre-emptive step and cashed the check a week ago, before the trouble could start. Or at least, that was the plan.

I understand why you are upset about the letter, but I don't understand why you think it means that you are personally in trouble. Clearly, Save the Children simply misunderstood who the website belonged to. Once they have been informed of its true ownership, there is no way they would try to take you to court over a website that you have no control over. I am concerned about Lindsay, but I am sure he is competent to deal with the situation. You should forward a copy of the letter to him, if you haven't already done so.

Apparently you don't understand the lengths some of these people will go to to screw us over. If you doubt it, just ask Kevin. As for me, I'm taking no chances.

I understand why you are upset about the letter, but I don't understand why you think it means that you are personally in trouble. Clearly, Save the Children simply misunderstood who the website belonged to. Once they have been informed of its true ownership, there is no way they would try to take you to court over a website that you have no control over. I am concerned about Lindsay, but I am sure he is competent to deal with the situation. You should forward a copy of the letter to him, if you haven't already done so.

Well, Tom linked me to Lindsay's "organization" because of an unfortunate choice of words on my part, even though I have little doubt that they knew very well that I have no control over Lindsay's site. That is how these people work. They take your words and use them to twist things around and make it look like you are guilty of something. Yes, I've done nothing, and if this went to court the judge would most likely rule in my favor, but the simple fact is, I do not have the money to for an attorney or anything else, and I just cannot afford risking going to court for any reason. Like I said, I am taking no chances.

Now, back to the money. As you will recall, it was sent to you on the understanding that it would go to a charity that worked to help children. I have no idea what its legal status is, but ethically, in my view, the money is not yours to do with as you see fit. I think you should get the permission of each of the people who donated money (and that includes me) before doing anything with it that is outside of the original aims. So where is the money now? What are you planning to do with it? Please keep us informed.

Yes, but when the charity rejected the funds, and especially once they got the law involved, everything changed. While you are technically correct--the money does not belong to me--I frankly don't give a rip. I am the one who put my ass on the line for this. Lindsay is out of country and everyone else is anonymous. That means I am solely responsible for the money that was sent in, which, in my mind, gives me the right to adopt an alternate plan as needed. I have done just that-- the monies will be used as I see fit. End of discussion.

This issue has nothing to do with your changing of position in the debate about the childlove movement, or anything like that. A change in opinion does not call your honour into question, as far as I am concerned. I am, however, concerned about what you are doing with the money that has been entrusted to your care.

On the contrary. This incident has driven home the point that the CLer activism of this type is not only NOT helping us gain acceptance by society, it is ultimately hindering us by earning us more and more enemies. I can actually foresee the gov't passing some law now that any donation made in the name of child love will be declared illegal and confiscated or somesuch. Just watch--I can almost guarantee some stupid law will arise out of this one little incident. The extent of society's hatred for us is so great that the gov't will ultimately deny us the right to even make donations or buy gifts for children.