[poet]

As far as the donation goes, my conscious is clear. I donate a big piece of my income to charities and my family and I work with thousands of impoverished kids in the inner city of Chicago every day.

Based on my experience, characterizing the poster as having a chip on his shoulder is accurate. I run into this problem all the time when working with those less well off than me and it's a serious problem. It's a significant barrier on communication between otherwise well intentioned people.

Finally, I stand by my characterization of innocuous. There was no harm or offense intended and I'd like to see you argue otherwise. I myself had the same reaction to the title of the submission and it's because of my middle class upbringing. What is importent here is not shaming people for their upbringing but rather to seek an understanding of why people react in different ways.

[igravious]

Hey ... no offense was meant, I never said that you're not a generous or giving person - I was just pointing out that we have no way of knowing whether you would have donated regardless of seeing the post that annoyed you. I think that you should go with your gut and donate anyhow :)

We'll have to agree to disagree, it's not obvious to me whether that guy his a chip - but in fairness I will always side with those less well off rather than those who are more affluent because all other things being equal that is the fair way to balance the inequalities in this world.

It was not innocuous, it was crass and gauche. I was snorting in derision whilst reading it and was very glad and not at all surprised that it was responded to strongly.

Middle class in the US (I presume you're from the US) is far beyond the reach of most of the world, when will you begin to learn this? I'm from Ireland where we as a nation only recently became affluent, maybe this colors things somewhat. Look, I have no issue with you but it's easier to rub shoulders with other people from vastly different backgrounds due to the decentralized open nature of the Net and maybe we should all remember that :)

[gnosis]

First, it's "conscience", not "conscious".

Second, the word "innocuous" means "harmless", not "not intended to offend".

It's quite obvious that the original comment was not intended to offend anyone. The guy who made it was probably oblivious to its potential offensiveness.

But that doesn't mean it was harmless. He was basically advocating making bribery easier, which is not only offensive to many people (no matter what his intentions were), but could very well make the world worse if people start acting to make what he's advocating a reality.

That said, kudos to your volunteering efforts and donations. More people should follow your example.

[poet]

When being pedantic, it's best to be right: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innocuous.

    1: producing no injury : harmless
    
    2: not likely to give offense or to arouse strong feelings or hostility : inoffensive, insipid

[gnosis]

But it was likely to give offense, and did give offense (as is evident by the responses he got).