it seems like all the arguments against funding BLVCKHAND due to "xx% of the treasury is too high" miss the point of an org like @purple. often fewer, more impactful initiatives are needed to make a difference. perhaps ~10% of the treasury should be the standard minimum to encourage more purposeful initiatives.
my argument is that if the shirts are going to be $500 they should have a picture of Dan's face instead of the BLVKHAND logo
whenever large spending is involved there must be clear definitions of success and failure, accountability, traceability, and then learning from successes and failures just throwing money at initiative is not enough, marketing is more involved than that for instance: what metric is tried to be improved? by how much?
I have no problem spending a large % of the treasury on something so long as it’s clear how the money is being spent, and the expected outcomes are quantified and reasonable. Unless I’m missing something, $500/shirt is essentially a direct cash transfer into someone’s pocket.