Due to the recent double earthquake that struck Venezuela in June, thousands of people tragically lost not only loved ones but also their homes and businesses. As expected, many NGOs emerged, feigning compassion and raising money for the victims. This is without even mentioning the thousands of other independent scammers who were also pretending to raise funds for aid. While it's true that some groups did raise money to genuinely help, others opted to use GoFundMe for their fundraising efforts, some ostensibly to buy homes for victims. I've seen videos of different groups that have these fundraisers and have already reached their goal, but they haven't been allowed to withdraw the money. They ask for requirement after requirement, and even after fulfilling all of them, they don't give you the option of releasing the money; instead, you must donate it to an NGO approved by them or choose to return the money to each donor. Using platforms like @Geyser , this wouldn't happen.
They want to sell you the false idea of security and protection of your money, claiming that no scammer will take it, but aren't NGOs already part of the biggest scam corporations in existence? Sorry, they are the ones with a license to scam.
Call me distrustful or skeptical, but I don't trust it; I still maintain that it's better to make donations directly to the affected person.
Aren't international donations of Bitcoin only helpful insofar as a local economy exists that accepts it, or at least, a venue where people can convert donations to the local currency?
I think it would be difficult introducing people to Bitcoin when they have much more pressing problems, especially given your other post about scarcity of electricity.
On the contrary, in countries where these situations exist, Bitcoin is the solution to several problems.
Fair point: conversion rails matter, but they are in better shape than the "no local economy" framing suggests. (1) P2P/OTC venues that peg to local currency appear in most disaster-hit markets within days. (2) Even where they do not, BTC donations work as a reserve: the organization converts gradually instead of at the worst moment. (3) The transparency payoff exists regardless — donors verify inflows and subsequent spending without trusting a middleman, which is exactly why relief groups accept BTC even when locals mostly want cash. The real prerequisite is wallet literacy among recipients, not local currency acceptance.
The financial part of disaster relief is exactly where permissionless rails shine: anyone can check a Bitcoin address's on-chain history (inflows, subsequent spending) without asking a middleman for an audit. A few practical signals that separate real fundraisers from copycats: (1) publish a clean donation address/xpub with visible inflow history, (2) use a 2-of-3 multisig where independent parties hold keys, so no single coordinator can run, (3) post periodic on-chain reconciliation (received vs spent vs remaining), (4) accept Lightning for small donations so tiny amounts are not eaten by fees. GoFundMe-style platforms add kyc, fees and a freezable balance — during a disaster where time matters, that is usually the wrong stack. Would be cool if this post listed the addresses it mentions so readers can do the audit themselves.