❕NEWS – Global Nonprofit Operation Smile Accepts Crypto Donations | NewProxyLists

This is the right way. If asking for donations, a wallet address always IS a great idea. It just open the door for donators to choose the payment option they prefer.

The addoption of crypto indeed will not only be an early adopter-marketing instrument, it will help this organisation to be a step in front of other when it comes to collect money for their projects. Well done!

Alone – Charity Multipurpose Non-profit WordPress Theme

ALONE 7.0 is live!
Compatible with WordPress 5.7.x. Alone always keeps bundled plugins up-to-date to improve your website with new features.

Amazing charity multipurpose non-profit WordPress theme with a very creative design that is quite flexible and can be used for different types of non-profit organizations, NGOs, campaign project.

ALONE – Powerful and…​

.

Help with Microsoft 365 non-profit

Advertising

y u no do it?

Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Server Host Nonprofit

Hello!

I work at a nonprofit (church) with middle schoolers. Myself and some volunteers are temporarily running a small Minecraft server … | Read the rest of https://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1833172&goto=newpost

Non-Profit Fully Managed Web Services

Hello WHT Forum,

I’m currently in charge of a small NPO (non-profit) organization board committee to develop a reliable web presence and … | Read the rest of https://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1830718&goto=newpost

usability – Why does everything, even technical, non-profit things, always seem to be designed *against* automation/convenience?

Here is a perfect example, but far from the only case. I want to remove all “emojis” from a string. Because they are not confined to a neat single range, or even many well-defined ranges, this is impossible to do with a simple regular expression.

There are many false solutions online which simply do not work; even if they worked when they were made, new ranges and individual emoji code points are added all the time to the Unicode standard.

For this reason, I (apparently) have to figure out how to automate all this:

  1. Load http://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/
  2. Parse that HTML output to get the latest version, currently “13.1”. It’s not obvious how to do that, and they could change how that directory listing is presented any day, breaking my mechanism.
  3. Load the right file, currently: https://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/13.1/emoji-sequences.txt
  4. Somehow parse out all code points and ranges, which vary in format such as “2B1B..2B1C”, “27B0”, “1F1FE 1F1EA”, etc.
  5. Somehow construct a new, massive regular expression containing all of these ranges and code points.
  6. Incorporate this regular expression into my actual code as a function.
  7. Now I am able to remove emojis by calling my function.

Note that they don’t have a convenient, easily parseable file with a permanent URL such as:

https://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/latest-version/emoji-sequences.json

If they at least had that, this would be much simpler, nicer and more logical. In fact, one might reasonably expect them to actually provide a regular expression on their own for common regexp engines.

In this, and many other situations, I get the feeling that the world is actively working against me. That I’m somehow “doing something I’m not supposed to do”. That my mentality is fundamentally incompatible with others’.

Can you think of some reasonable explanation as to why they make it so hard and seemingly go out of their way to make it cumbersome to automate? Why am I not allowed to easily block/remove emojis from a text if I don’t want to see them? Isn’t that a very reasonable and common desire? Emojis work in certain contexts, but in others, they are a pure annoyance and make it visually unpleasant to read a text.

Please note that, again, all existing “emoji removal” solutions are broken. They don’t block all of them. Or they block way too many, including legitimate Unicode, non-emoji characters. I’m primarily asking about why they make it so hard, rather than asking for a solution. I already know that I will have to make my own mechanism, and I’m going to do it, and I can do it, but it will take me a lot of time and energy for seemingly no good reason.

To give another example, I often want to figure out the latest version of some open source software. Frequently, they just have no simple plaintext/JSON URL to do this; I have to parse their HTML webpage made for humans. Even if we disregard the initial work that has to be invested by me and every other individual who need to automate these kinds of things, a major secondary issue is that they can break at any time in the future, so we need to keep updating our code as they change their “not really made for computers” website layouts.

I fundamentally don’t understand this, and I hope that there is some reasonable explanation.

unicode – Why does everything, even technical, non-profit things, always seem to be designed *against* automation/convenience?

Here is a perfect example, but far from the only case. I want to remove all “emojis” from a string. Because they are not confined to a neat single range, or even many well-defined ranges, this is impossible to do with a simple regular expression.

There are many false solutions online which simply do not work; even if they worked when they were made, new ranges and individual emoji code points are added all the time to the Unicode standard.

For this reason, I (apparently) have to figure out how to automate all this:

  1. Load http://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/
  2. Parse that HTML output to get the latest version, currently “13.1”. It’s not obvious how to do that, and they could change how that directory listing is presented any day, breaking my mechanism.
  3. Load the right file, currently: https://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/13.1/emoji-sequences.txt
  4. Somehow parse out all code points and ranges, which vary in format such as “2B1B..2B1C”, “27B0”, “1F1FE 1F1EA”, etc.
  5. Somehow construct a new, massive regular expression containing all of these ranges and code points.
  6. Incorporate this regular expression into my actual code as a function.
  7. Now I am able to remove emojis by calling my function.

Note that they don’t have a convenient, easily parseable file with a permanent URL such as:

https://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/latest-version/emoji-sequences.json

If they at least had that, this would be much simpler, nicer and more logical. In fact, one might reasonably expect them to actually provide a regular expression on their own for common regexp engines.

In this, and many other situations, I get the feeling that the world is actively working against me. That I’m somehow “doing something I’m not supposed to do”. That my mentality is fundamentally incompatible with others’.

Can you think of some reasonable explanation as to why they make it so hard and seemingly go out of their way to make it cumbersome to automate? Why am I not allowed to easily block/remove emojis from a text if I don’t want to see them? Isn’t that a very reasonable and common desire? Emojis work in certain contexts, but in others, they are a pure annoyance and make it visually unpleasant to read a text.

Please note that, again, all existing “emoji removal” solutions are broken. They don’t block all of them. Or they block way too many, including legitimate Unicode, non-emoji characters. I’m primarily asking about why they make it so hard, rather than asking for a solution. I already know that I will have to make my own mechanism, and I’m going to do it, and I can do it, but it will take me a lot of time and energy for seemingly no good reason.

To give another example, I often want to figure out the latest version of some open source software. Frequently, they just have no simple plaintext/JSON URL to do this; I have to parse their HTML webpage made for humans. Even if we disregard the initial work that has to be invested by me and every other individual who need to automate these kinds of things, a major secondary issue is that they can break at any time in the future, so we need to keep updating our code as they change their “not really made for computers” website layouts.

I fundamentally don’t understand this, and I hope that there is some reasonable explanation.

web – Online photo management for a non-profit organization

I am looking for photo hosting for a non-profit organization I work with, and it seems that most sites are designed for individual or professional photographers, not for groups of people.

We organize a summer program, with a handful of employees and new participants each summer. We would like to allow participants to upload, caption and tag photos. Staff should be able to administer the system.

What we really need is:

  • private access reserved for members, via a private URL or password.
  • administrators create folders, manage photos, and set a password for members to download.
  • participants must be able to upload, tag and caption their own photos.
  • administrators can download high resolution originals

Features that would be good:

  • Different administrators for different files
  • Comments and likes
  • Facebook integration for login

We are ready to pay for it.

I looked at flickr, but the configuration of the photo stream doesn't really give us the organization we want. I looked at smugmug, but it doesn't seem like their system allows guest uploaders to tag and tag photos. It also requires a paid account or social media account to comment, which will work for most but not all of our users. I know there are many other photo hosting sites out there, but I hope someone can point me in the right direction, so I didn’t no need to try each of them one by one to see if it will work for us.

List of non-profit domain name registers? [closed]

What domain registers are non-profit organizations? What top level domains do they manage? What restrictions do these areas have?

Here are three examples:

  • the .org,.ngo, .ong, .xn--c1avg, .xn--i1b6b1a6a2e, .xn--nqv7f and .xn--nqv7fs00ema top-level domains are managed by the Public Interest Registry (PIR), a non-profit organization based in Virginia, USA, created by the Internet Society (ISOC). (But PIR may soon be sold to Ethos Capital and there is a campaign against this sale.)

  • the .post the top-level domain is managed by the Universal Postal Union, an agency of the United Nations. But the top-level domain is strictly limited to postal organizations only.

  • the .eu The top-level domain, which appears to be missing from the ICANN list of registers, is managed by the "European Register of Internet Domain Names" (EURid vzw), a non-profit association based in Diegem, in Belgium.

Are there more?

skills – Do you know of websites that link technical volunteers with humanitarian / non-profit projects?

There are of course many open source projects to contribute, but they don't always have a humanitarian purpose, the needs are generally more technological.
In my opinion, it is not easy to filter out dead projects, duplicates, or know where and how they are actually used (and therefore, if they are contributing to humanitarian aid).
To be honest, Mozilla and LibreOffice are probably useful for providing free web and office tools, yes. And this website looks pretty good for open source contributions.

These questions have many answers, pointing to (specific) projects and links (but mostly dead):
How can programming capacity be used to help people experiencing poverty?
Ways to use your skills as a developer to give back to the community / charities
Nonprofit technology for nonprofits?

Some websites seemed to be doing what I was looking for (i.e. listing the projects you could contribute to), but they are now dead or abandoned:
anti-poverty developers, openhatch.org, Random Hacks of Kindness (RHoK), geekgive.org, Tech Soup


This answer has an interesting point:

Unfortunately, most causes of poverty do not respond well to programs
solutions. Google has made a valiant effort with the Google.org project,
but after 6 years of testing, they have largely found that only the don
money to lower level "field" organizations has a lot of effect. A
a recent New York Times article highlights the problem: Google
It's hard to reinvent
Philanthropy

But I think, almost a decade later, that (software) engineering can be useful on certain projects (3D printing, embedded software, mobile applications …).

Such a website does not need to be IT oriented (it could cover all profile needs like UX, mechanical / electronic engineers, lawyers, people "on the ground" to get training and reimbursement, etc.) As long as it is possible to search for tasks / roles that a developer can help.

volunteerermatch.org is a good example of what I'm talking about.