Talk:Care2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Cleanup[edit]

Article could use some NPOV cleanup. --Alan Au 18:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

List of social networking websites on AfD[edit]

List of social networking websites is currently an AfD candidate. You are invited to partake in this discussion. Czj 18:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

List of social networking websites on AfD[edit]

List of social networking websites is currently a candidate for deletion. You are invited to partake in the discussion.--Crossmr 14:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Click-to-donate sites[edit]

Could Care2's ten click-to-donate sites be mentioned, and could this page be added to the category of click-to-donate sites? Also, are there any sources saying that the donations are really made? Thanks in advance! --Kletta 01:35, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Sure, here are some sources (these are the faqs from some of the races at Care2):

-Curien1000 (talk) 02:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I found several references from reliable sources that I would like to work into the article, but the "unencyclopedic list" really needs to be converted to prose first. Here are the articles, if anyone is up to working them into the text properly before I can get to it:
1. Piece on the Rainforest section, printed in The Environmental Magazine but cited at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1594/is_2_11/ai_94775460
2. Another article on the Big Cats section of care2.com, printed in Healthy & Natural Journal but cited at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HKL/is_5_7/ai_66918263
3. A piece about online commerce on the site, printed in American Demographics, cited at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4021/is_ISSN_0163-4089/ai_75171059
Also, while not a reliable source, http://comm599.wetpaint.com/page/Care2.com?t=anon claims that "Care2 has appeared in many liberal/progressive publications including Utne Reader, Healthy & Natural Journal, E/The Environmental Magazine, etc." which confirms two of the listings above from findarticles.com, and a little more searching ought to turn up useable source articles in Utne Reader, and perhaps other publications.
One other possibility is an article listed at http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070402005384&newsLang=en but I'm not sure yet whether it was published in a valid publication.
Forestgarden (talk) 19:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

regarding item 2. Contrary to the article, the 'race for the rainforest' and the 'race for the big cats' ran concurrently, although the 'race for the rainforest' was the first contest offered. I can state this with absolute certainty as I was a daily contributor to 'race for the rainforest' and enterd into the 'race for the big cats' on its first day of existence.

regarding item 3. While the article is fairly accurate in content, it is not so accurate in context, possibly as it comes fom a business and marketing oriented publication. Care2 does not use advertising to sell environmental issues, it uses environmental issues to sell advertising. I am of the suspicion that the ten percent it donates is the minimum required to obtain its license to operate under its business type classification and the ten percent would also be 100% tax deductible from the gross, meaning every penny Care2 donates to the charities of its choice are monies which would have gone into the public purse. This is a common practice amongst business' and corporations with significant cash flow to divert taxable income to personally supported endeavours/special interest groups. C. Richardson, UNFICYP, CPSM, 1988 Nobel Peace Prize (Care2 member since March 13, 2000)

"Notability" in question?[edit]

Gimme a break! I've been using Care2 every day since 2001 - whereas Wikipedia, for example, started to look somewhat worthy of my serious attention only in the past two years or so.

Why am I offering my own experience as an example?

Because my experience is certainly no less legitimate and worthy of attention than the very limited personal experience of those who in all these years apparently haven't heard about Care2. (Or why would anyone call in question its "notability"?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.142.52.10 (talk) 20:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I have been a Care2 member since March 13, 2000 and while I'm not certain its notability should be in question (up to 10,618,161 members). Its credibility certainly is by many of its remaining members of significant tenure. Care2 was founded by advertising executives (Randy Paynter etc.), to tap a specific segment of the population for 'demographically targetted' advertising using environmental issues as the bait and using the World Wildlife Federation to lend credibility to the endeavour. It seems that the relationship between the WWF and Care2 has disolved for reasons unstated by either. In regards to Care2's position regarding their advertising clients i would refer you to Randy Paynter's own blog on the subject at http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/644445 titled, "Thoughts on Care2's Corporate Advertising." Possibly Care2 rates mention in Wikipedia as an example of a business entity which fails to uphold its stated principles in practice. I refer specifically to the fact that Care2 REFUSES to screen its client's ad content. This somewhat disproves the following quote from the above mentioned blog, "One of our most important commitments to our members is to not allow deceptive advertising or harmful products on our site." In April 2008 Care2 was "forced" (quoting Kristen, the Care2 forums moderator), to switch over to a different platform by the third party company which actually operates the site. While prior to this platform change Care2 was no less secure than any comparable site, in the last 36 hours (March 6-9, 2009 i have seen numerous Phishing attacks posing as generic offers advertising "Live and Work in the USA" "CONGRATULATIONS" "You've Got 1 Free Year" and variations on this theme seeking personal information. Verification of this may be found both on the Care2 site as the attempts are numerous and prevalent and also at a locked facebook album of screenshots i created at http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2018130&id=1043791948&l=89ab6 for the edification of the Care2 site operators. It is painfully obvious that by neglecting to screen the advertising content Care2 is putting its users at risk of Phishing attacks and perpetrators of this type of crime are taking full advantage of it. Personally, I would include Care2 as an item on your Phishing wiki as, although I have never looked that up on here, I'm pretty certain it is included. C. Richardson, UNFICYP, CPSM, 1988 Nobel Peace Prize. (and current Care2 member of 9 years tenure)


There are indeed some bitter members, stemming mostly from partisan political bickering.

However, there is more to the site than just the discussion section and petition website. There is also advice and shopping along the environmentalism theme. As well, groups on a variety of subjects, allowing interests and discussions on virtually any subject. Groups and people's individual pages can be edited to one's own satisfaction, as long as there is no advertising used. There is a photo section, e~mail and messaging system, and E~Cards, as well.

As to rogue advertisements, apparently, there has been some, though rare, yet, generally follow in line with the concept of the website. There is an active Feedback Section that addresses any problems rather quickly.

It is certainly a Social Networking site.


Nantucketnoon (talk) 22:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC)