commit 50b33c077e0e7daaed005c43b1cc4536432acd13
parent 90ef5a001ffb75a57360af7fa0e28441c752d917
Author: Michiel Leenaars <michiel.ml@nlnet.nl>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 04:38:40 +0100
Additional requirement, expanded ethics section
Diffstat:
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/ethic.tex b/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/ethic.tex
@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
This project is a free and open source software project. The program presented in this project is available under GNU V3.0 license in the repository git.taler.net/donau.git . Reviewers, and later readers, will be able to download, compile and install the software as they wish.
-Ethical considerations were at the root of this project. Current systems oblige people making donations to charities to reveal to the tax authorities the donations made and the institutions supported. This encroaches on the private sphere of some people, who do not wish it to be known who they support. Support for certain organizations can lead to stigmatization of the donor.
+Ethical considerations were at the root of this project. At their essence, donations are ethical acts outsourcing a moral drive for change to professionals that (promise to) act on them in a manner that is compatible with the value system of a donor. Current systems oblige people making donations to charities to go on record and report to their government the donations made, explicitly linking them to the causes and institution(s) supported. This has a self-censoring or chilling effect due to fear for future potential repercussions in complex and volatile political climates: information may linger on inside the bureaucratic system, and later cause unknown harm. Such concerns about real-world ramifications on personal choices in the ethical domain cause stress to donors, and the current approach encroaches on the private sphere of those who do not wish it to be known who they support. As identified in this paper, support for certain organizations and their linked causes can not just lead to stigmatisation but to phyical harassement and far worse.
-The aim of this project is to offer greater protection of privacy, leading to greater tax justice. Indeed, some people prefer not to claim the tax reduction to which they are entitled in order to protect their privacy.
+The current mechanisms place an unfair bureaucratic cost on spending an equivalent cumulative amount to philanthropy via supporting smaller causes - denying intersectional interests donors may have, and disadvantaging smaller, early stage and more lean public causes. The latter notably includes "niche" causes linked to (combinations of) cultural, sexual, ethnic, religious and social minorities. Smaller causes often do not have the capacity to offer support for achieving fiscal compensation to their donors, reprieving their (latent) donor constituencies of the amplifying effects of such compensation and making them less likely to be supported.
+
+The aim of this project is to simplify donating for all and offer non-discrimatory access to tax benefits and greater protection of privacy, leading to greater tax justice and a philanthropic climate. We want to reverse the situation where people prefer not to claim the tax reduction to which they are entitled in order to protect their privacy.
diff --git a/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/requirements.tex b/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/requirements.tex
@@ -129,6 +129,7 @@ some form.
\item Codes of conduct
\item Restricted access mechanism
\item Donation matching with a reference
+\item Proof of donation matching by third parties
\item Anonymous donation matching by employer
\end{itemize}
@@ -263,7 +264,7 @@ fundraising.
(This might use the features from compound weighted donation.)
-\subsubsection{Feature: Staged donation}
+\subsubsection{Feature: Staged donation}
This is a feature that works along the lines of so-called smart
contracts. As goals are incrementally met by the project, donated
@@ -359,6 +360,17 @@ to include that reference when making their donations, the donor
providing the matching can `see' that they are being heard/are getting
PR mileage out of their donation.
+\subsubsection{Feature: Proof of donation matching by third parties}
+
+While one would like to be able to trust each and every claim on the website or
+social media account of every charitable organisation towards matching of
+donations, donation matching is a form of social engineering that is
+potentially easy and attractive to tamper with. A critical donor may prefer to
+have actual proof of such altruistic matching irrevocably taking place, in
+order to weed out any attempt to trick them into a false sense of urgency -
+believing their donation will temporarily have a disproportionately larger
+effect.
+
\subsubsection{Feature: Anonymous donation matching by employer }
Quite a few large employers do donation matching as part of their
