paint chips, I love that story about the books, thanks for sharing.

I'm not understanding the strong reaction against auntjen's comment that sometimes the motivations of celebrities' actions should be questioned. Surely there are stars out there who make a show of supporting a good cause only because their publicists tell them to. Yeah, it's nice for the recipients at that moment in time, but my admiration is reserved for those who do it sincerely. Sometimes you can tell the sincere ones, sometimes you can't. But I see nothing wrong with wondering about their motivations.

Thank you, Janet. I said I wasn't going to participate in this thread further, but this whole thing has really been bothering me. I think what it boils down to is that lukkiirish probably anticipated that this thread would be, as I stated above, a positive and "feel good" thing. When I brought up what I did about motivation, I think it angered her because she felt I was unnecessarily bringing a negative tone to what she intended as a constructive thread. My comments failed her expectations.

As far as motivations go, I feel that mine were misread here. I never intended to anger anyone or to cause any kind of emotional reaction -- my intent was honestly to just bring another facet to the conversation. I do stand by my apology for my apparent failure to express myself well enough so that others would understand my intent. But I also feel hurt and somewhat bewildered that a couple of you lashed out at me.

I believe that motivations do matter. What happened in this thread clearly indicates that the motivations behind an action can be easily misunderstood or misread, and hurt or angry feelings can result.

First time I've read this. I understand lukk here. She was trying to tell us about something good someone else did, especially a "star." Second response was full of negativity which I still don't understand.

The guy's a major star in the music industry, he needs no publicity.

Why would someone shell out millions for self-recognition when they're already famous?

I wouldn't care if he got on top of the Sear's Building and screamed, "I'm the King of the World!" lol.

I know when I donate I feel good and I tell my dh if I did a good deed that day. Yeah, we should do stuff quietly, but there are so many times we need to pat ourselves on the back.

Like the time I went to Sonic and bought two dinners and gave the walk out delivery person (not really a waitress) $5.00 as a tip. She was my age, looked poor and I thought she could use five bucks.

I came home feeling PROUD of myself. So what?

Jen, I think the problem is you questioned Will.I.am's motivation intead of just saying, "That's great. One time I heard of a guy giving money in the park....etc.," That way we wouldn't be questioning Lukk's topic or Will.i.am himself.

Jen, I think the problem is you questioned Will.I.am's motivation intead of just saying, "That's great. One time I heard of a guy giving money in the park....etc.," That way we wouldn't be questioning Lukk's topic or Will.i.am himself.

I know, Oakley. That's exactly what I just expressed above.
:-)

I forgot to comment on something that's been bugging me my whole adult life.

I am SO proud of Will.i.am because he is giving to Americans. I am extremely tired of the USA and movie stars giving all their money to foreign countries and adopting their babies while not adopting here.

We need to help those at home first, and THEN give to other countries!

That's all. lol

jobling: I understand that the motivations of a lot of actors may not be the sincerest, even so why would she feel it necessary to question the motive of someone who has just paid off the mortgages of 2 families and announced that a fund has been set up in an effort to help yet more Americans? That's like questioning the motive of Brad Pitt who has been trying to restore New Orleans; another very positive effort. So far, all of this has been done with his own cash, not sponsered funds and based on your comment about other people in show business that alone says something about his motive.

There are so many middle class Americans, not people in other countries, but people here at home who have done everything right and are still loosing their homes. These people are in desparate need of a rescue and finally someone GETS that. Did his good deed really deserve that kind of reaction? I don't think so. Like I said earlier, he used the same platform that a ton of other actors/actresses have used as well for their causes. Why put a shadow of negativity over a genuine gester? And really that's all the cynicism is, negative feedback which in this case got a very negative response and IMHO deservingly so.

I also think the saying, "people in glass houses" offered by another poster fits very well. In one sentence, there is the pondering of maybe doing something to help, which is great but then in the next sentence she's critizing people who ARE actually doing something already? Sounds very hypocritical to me. Do I wish I had been more calm with my comments, sure, but it in no way changes the way I feel about her response. I'm passionate about this one because with the work I do, I'm seeing people loose their homes every day, first hand and it's not right. I know just how badly these people need every ounze of help they can get and how little is being offered. So yea her negative cynicism struck a nerve.

Anyone who is familiar with Will I Am or took the time to watch the clip would clearly understand what his motivations are. It's obvious.

I agree. Will.i.am seems like an extremely shy person. When I saw him on Oprah when it was told he was going to pay for all of these kids college tuitions, he looked extremely uncomfortable to be in the limelight like that. It made me really like him even more. And obviously, neither he nor Black Eyed Peas need any additional press coverage. I think it's great that this is made public because I do think it inspires other people to do more. And I think he deserves to be acknowledged for it. But I don't think he necessarily wants or needs to be acknowledged. It's just a really nice thing. Why not just leave it at that?

I'm another who's never heard of Will I Am or Black Eyed Peas -- I'm SO out of touch! LOL

I am extremely tired of the USA and movie stars giving all their money to foreign countries

Amen to that!!

The USA (Govt, Celebs and others) give HUGE amounts of money to other countries which is commendable but I'd so much like to see more of that money stay here. Especially when while we send that money over, the criticism of the US by so many countries flows over in return.

As for motivations, I'm going to venture a guess that there are VERY few people who don't go ahead and take that tax deduction when they make a charitable donation. Not to say that the tax deduction is the reason they made the donation, but let's face it, they are deriving some benefit from making the donation.

I was raised to believe that the reason you give is not as important as the giving itself. I would venture to guess that if everyone who really derived ABSOLUTELY no benefit from giving were the only ones who gave, charitable donations would go from a flood to a very small trickle.

IMO, kudos to everyone who gives money, time, whatever, to those in need, regardless of their reasons for doing so.

Well once again, I spent too much time writing a response (to Jboling) and I'm late to the party.

Yes I absolutely did not feel this topic was a place to start talk with a negative tone and sometimes it's important to really try to understand the intent of a post because not all of them are up for debate.

I was actually very hesitant to post about this topic for just this reason, but then I realized most of us are fortunately in a better place in our lives and maybe it would help inspire some of us to donate to his fund as well or to just do something to help locally in your own town. Whatever you want to do, people everywhere need help. So I was very disappointed to see (as Oakley said) an immediate negative response.

I don't think Will I Am or his charity work deserved that.

Lukkiirish, how many times do you want me to apologize? Obviously, I misunderstood that your post was not "up for debate." Can we not just let this go, now that we've both tried as best we can to explain where we were coming from?

Well everytime I post someone else has posted again...so I respond...like I've been told before, that's how threads go.

besides, I thought you weren't going to contribute any more, after all we did get the instruction to "carry on" right. Oh and forgive me please but I'm still irriated.

ENOUGH! Time out! Take it to email and don't tell us about it.

No way ... I don't want her emailing me. I've explained why I said what I said, I've apologized, and I've tried to further explain why I said what I did, because my intentions were not in any way malicious towards her. Lukkiirish can remain irritated or she can choose to get over it and move on. At this point, I don't really care which she opts for.

excuse me? unless you have something to comment regarding the topic, you should just stay out of it. I'm not some child who is willing to allow you or anyone else to scold or patronize me. And don't bother emailing me, I'm not interested.

Showing your true colors again Natal? Like people don't already know you're nothing but a trouble maker and instigator.

Jen, for your information, I was positing my responses before I saw some of the posts, it wasn't to continue to harp but only to resond. You come across so curt and bossy. This isnt' the first time you've done that, but I'm going to respond to it where others usually don't. Please understand, we are thinking humans too, we don't need your direction or for you to tell us when to stop posting. You like to do that when you put your foot in your mouth; like it's your choice as to when the conversation is over. Instead of trying to control the situation, just leave it alone, eventually the chatter amongst others will stop. But that chatter, is our prerogative because of the comments before it.

Ah Natal, why must you always come into a thread to further stir the pot and not post your comments about the TOPIC? Talk about beating a dead horse! lol.

Jen, you made quite the assumption when you said Lukks topic "wasn't open for debate." That's putting words in her mouth & a bit sarcastic, don't you think? She never said it wasn't open for debate but there was nothing about her post to debate about.

Like I said above, if you wanted to change it to other star's getting publicity (or the man in the park), that's fine, but you "assumed" Will.i.am did the same thing. And that's taking at potshot at Lukk's post.

Lukk, there's a lot of good "stars" out there and I'm glad to see another is shining brightly.

Oh, for crying out loud Oakley - did you not read where Lukkiirish posted: Yes I absolutely did not feel this topic was a place to start talk with a negative tone and sometimes it's important to really try to understand the intent of a post because not all of them are up for debate.

Thanks Oak, and thanks too for turning the thread back towards the positive. Hopefully it will now stay in that direction.

This conversation is finished. Isn't that what you wanted? Let's focus on the positive now. PLEASE.

Lukkiirish, I never once felt the need to slam you with a personal attack. I hope you feel infinitely vindicated by having called me "curt and bossy."

And now, back to our regularly scheduled program...I think that broadcasting that kind of philanthropy can inspire others to step forward. I think will.i.am is terrific. I have been a fan for years and wish him continued success.

You're kidding right? LOL don't try to make me look like the bad guy here and this is not a personal attack, it's a fact, it's something you do...and often. I see it in lots of posts and never say anything, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. And I'm certainly not going to allow you to do it to me without standing up for myself and calling you on it. I've said my piece, you've apologized and said you were bowing out. Why don't you honor your apology and let this alone so we can both go about our day? At this point, I really have no interest in anything you have to say.

But Jen, she said that after the fact. She had NO idea (and I'm assuming!) that her nice topic would instantly bring negativity towards her subject.

I do understand how some movie stars do things "nice" for publicity. But I didn't understand how this particular topic could raise negativity towards Will.i.am. You were trying to make it sound like the guy had ulterior motives, that's all, and I can see why lukk was taken aback.

You did the same thing to me when I did the "Pet Peeve" topic when it was supposed to be fun. You immediately came in there and said we shouldn't be making fun of people, and THEN about a week or two later you did a similar topic!

It's only been recently that you've been on a "lecture roll" towards others here and their topics. Not sure why, but all's cool.

Peace to all! lol

It is the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them. - Mark Twain

Whoa. Someone above said something about people living in glass houses? I think it more aptly applies to a few people here preaching against negativity and lectures.

I really shouldn't prolong this, but what I noticed most from the first post was a slightly snide remark toward Oprah. Go figure. I am not criticizing the remark, I might even agree with it. But I bring it up only to say that it's pretty much impossible for people to be completely non-judgmental. So we need to let that realization color our opinions, too. We'd all be happier if we don't sweat the small stuff, eh?

I was taken aback by the slight made on Oprah, also. She's one of the most generous and giving people on the planet, always striving for progress and helping others in whatever way she can. It's her life. How she deserves that is beyond me. And why should she be required to talk about her own donations, all while people are questioning the people who do. That unkind and cynical statement towards Oprah kind of opened the door for negativity, imo. I don't see what's at all telling about it.

I didn't watch the video or know who I AM is but celebrities often use their names to promote things dear to their hearts. Sometimes it's the only positive that being in the public eye is good for, for them. It's important to get a cause out there and to inspire others by example to follow their own hearts and do the same. It serves the cause.

Spring, the point I was trying to make with Oprah is everything she does, is tied to a sponser. Yes, she's built her school in Africa, and helped people, no question about it and that's wonderful, I'm not putting that down however, all the things she does here in the states is not from her pocket of billions it's sponser driven. That's why I made it clear in my original post, all of the money is HIS money that he's earned, no one is backing him, there is no ulterior motive. Yes, it's giving but for me personally when he said it's his money, that struck me as unique and pure and that's the point I was trying to convey.

there is no reason to go after Oak on this. Clearly she just plain got what I was trying to say where others obviously didn't. geeze...why not focus on the purpose of the thread to begin with...it's so much more important.

lukkirish, Before you continue on with your last post, you might want to do a bit of research on the subject of Oprah's giving. I don't believe you have a well balanced picture based on publicly available info.

the point I was trying to make with Oprah is everything she does, is tied to a sponser.

That's incorrect. While some money is "donated by corporations in exchange for publicity, behind the scenes Winfrey personally donates more of her own money to charity than any other show-business celebrity in America. In 2005 she became the first black person listed by Business Week as one of America's top 50 most generous philanthropists, having given an estimated $303 million."

Oprah's philanthropy:

In 1998, Winfrey began Oprah's Angel Network, a charity aimed at encouraging people around the world to make a difference in the lives of underprivileged others. Accordingly, Oprah's Angel Network supports charitable projects and provides grants to nonprofit organizations around the world that share this vision. To date, Oprah's Angel Network has raised more than $51,000,000 ($1 million of which was donated by Jon Bon Jovi). Winfrey personally covers all administrative costs associated with the charity, so 100% of all funds raised go to charity programs.

Although Winfrey's show is known for raising money through her public charity and the cars and gifts she gives away on TV are often donated by corporations in exchange for publicity, behind the scenes Winfrey personally donates more of her own money to charity than any other show-business celebrity in America. In 2005 she became the first black person listed by Business Week as one of America's top 50 most generous philanthropists, having given an estimated $303 million. Winfrey was the 32nd most philanthropic. She has also been repeatedly ranked as the most philanthropic celebrity.

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Oprah asked her viewers to open their heartsÂand they did. As of September 2006, donations to the Oprah Angel Network Katrina registry total more than $11 million. Homes have been built in four statesÂTexas, Mississippi, Louisiana, AlabamaÂbefore the one year anniversary of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Winfrey also matched her viewers' donations by personally giving $10 million to the cause.

Winfrey has also helped 250 African-American men continue or complete their education at Morehouse College in Atlanta, Georgia.

Winfrey was the recipient of the first Bob Hope Humanitarian Award at the 2002 Emmy Awards for services to television and film.

To celebrate two decades on national TV, and to thank her employees for their hard work, Winfrey took her staff and their families (1065 people in total) on vacation to Hawaii in the summer of 2006.

Here is a link that might be useful: Oprah

You are right, the purpose of the thread was clear. Though the remark on Oprah was pretty bad and certainly changed the tone. I don't know I AM but I am familiar with Oprah.

I think Oprah both uses her own cash, very generously, and uses the opportunity and the support of her vast resources to do good in the world. And she does. The world is a better place for her being here. Far be it from me to tell her what to do with her hard-earned money. But I have no doubt she has big plans. You can't take it with you. And her life is about progress and helping others, so, however she sees fit, from her own good heart. And it's really nobody else's business. It's her own hard-earned funds to do with as she pleases. I see no need to even determine or qualify the source of the funds she's able to come up with.

And she should also enjoy herself immensely, in peace, while she is here, imo. She has blessed and graced this planet, imo. We should all be so fine an individual.

Isn't it ironic that a slanderous comment made about Oprah's philanthropy has brought silence to this thread about Will.I.Am's?

I've been watching Oprah since her first show in the 80's. I realize she is a very special lady and if this is the case with her charities then I'm more than happy to stand corrected. However, as I said, his idea rang special to me and I wanted to share. I don't believe my opinion as to whether Oprah should have donated or not changes the tone of my post, it would have been nice and encouraging to see a donation from her that's my opinion. You're more than welcome to yours and if you disagree that's fine. It certainly doesn't change the message about Will I Am nor the cynicsim offered in response.

After going through this all day, I'm done. Enough with the negativity in this thread. If you all want to keep chattering about it, have fun but don't expect anymore responses from me unless of course it's regarding something positive like the fund, paying it forward or other charities that are taking place.

"If only one's actions mattered then the monetary amount of a gift would determine its value. Instead I believe that the spirit of a gift gives it a true Value beyond cost or impact. "

Well, that's nice, but a $5.00 bill given in the spirit of love and compassion doesn't buy as many groceries as a $5000 check written because a publicist said to do it. If you'd rather get 5 bucks given with little hearts than 5 grand, I'm sorry for you.

I'm not onboard with the warm 'n' fuzzy feelings show. You can talk all the love and happiness you want, but at the end of the day (and the balance sheet) only your actions really count.

I'd be very surprised if she hasn't donated to a cause she's obviously supporting by spotlighting on her show. I don't understand where you get the idea that she didn't make a donation. Just because she didn't talk about her own financial contribution (brag/self-promote)? Maybe she doesn't want to take the light off of him and the cause by her own generous contribution. It might have been much more than his.

Really, you're dammed if you do and dammed if you don't.

I remember when Ted Turner donated a billion dollars to the United Nations. He just got up, pulled the mike off, and walked off of an interview saying how he 'didn't have to take this' when the journalist started questioning him on it in a negative way. Very sad.

Oh boy, I guess it is my turn again.

Ideefixe, I respect your view. You have a valid and very practical point, but I see it a bit differently. Can I explain?

Putting a cost to kindness gets into a world where some people are placed on a pedestal of THE model of character when many more are sacrificing in quiet, humble ways. The highest achievement in life would be to honestly say that one did the very best that one could. And that bar is set differently for everyone.

You said:
"If you'd rather get 5 bucks given with little hearts than 5 grand, I'm sorry for you."

I'm not. Yes, I *would* rather be given a heartfelt 5 dollars. Call it what you want, naivety, idealism, even ignorance if you like, but I would rather know that someone in this world thought enough of me to give something of themselves. And I'm fine with having less if that is where my ideals take me.

But I'm all into Hope that way. :O)

Me too, Paint... Sure me. When our son was little, when we first adopted him, he'd say, "Sure me" when he agreed. Our family still uses his phrase to express agreement.

The widow's mite.

I've read all of the comments here and I finally had a chance to watch the segment on I Am Home. This is what I saw and heard regarding Will.I.Am. He appeared to be shy, humble and passionate about his quest and his goals. I also watched the second tape where he gave his grandmother a house and went back to visit his old home. This is a man that grew up poor and as an adult has decided to give back. Frankly, after watching the segment, how anyone could question his motives is beyond me. Here is a successful young man who is NOT in the news daily being talked about doing drugs, drinking, beating anyone or doing anything negative and instead of his venture being received positively, there was immediate negative energy. I just don't understand that. You know folk often criticize the news, media and TV for often portraying negative information about celebrities and here we have something positive and still there are complaints.

I think it is fantastic what he is doing and I intend to contribute to his fund. Lurkkish thank you for bringing this to our attention because frankly, I've heard more lately about negative things regarding celebrities going on and had not heard a word about this. Really, I mean how sad is the fact that such a wonderful cause is going on, yet hardly any press has put been put out there about it. Also, here is another tidbit that many may not know about, often young musical celebrities like Will.I.Am have charities and give back but this fact is not often reported, rather the focus is on the bad boys and girls of the music world and all the crazy shenagins that they do.

deborahnj, you "get it" and with all sincerety, made my day! Thanks so much!

Lurkkiirish, it was my pleasure and again thank you for highlighting this wonderful cause!

Very well said Debnj-

I love the Black Eyed Peas, and I heard about the I AM Home organization on a morning radio show. Kudos to Will I Am for giving back to the community.

I'm with you, deborah & lukki. He seems not only genuine but rather wise. Thanks for letting me know about it. I'll always remember his grandmother's reaction, and his comments about the house he grew up in. He's the real thing.

I looked up a concept I recalled reading once, a list of the levels of charity, or tzedakah, from judaism. Here it is, I think it is something that may add to the conversation. Well, the conversation about charity that is :).

*****
Levels of Tzedakah (Charity)

Certain kinds of tzedakah are considered more meritorious than others. The Talmud describes these different levels of tzedakah, and Rambam organized them into a list. The levels of charity, from the least meritorious to the most meritorious, are:

Giving begrudgingly
Giving less that you should, but giving it cheerfully.
Giving after being asked
Giving before being asked
Giving when you do not know the recipient's identity, but the recipient knows your identity
Giving when you know the recipient's identity, but the recipient doesn't know your identity
Giving when neither party knows the other's identity
Enabling the recipient to become self-reliant

And how sad it is, for the giver, and the cause, that people who step up to the plate are questioned, discounted, and cross-examined at all. Such a judgmental society we live in. To our own detriment.

This one serves well, "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth."

Flyleft, wasn't that something when she realized it was for her?

Polly, I'm so glad to hear that he's utilizing other platforms to make people aware of his fund. Thanks for sharing.

Runninginplace, that is interesting, but it seems there is one missing: Giving without expecting anything in return.