This is like saying someone offered a human sacrifice for donating to charity, therefore incentivising charity donations is one use-case of human sacrifices that is really cool. What?

You can't be serious. They were offered a simple collectable token. Why is that bad? People get stickers for voting.

I was going to donate $1000 to charity (or nothing to charity), but now I have the option to pay an additional $100 gas/minting fee for a pointless proof-of-wasted-energy token?

I'm not saying that this is either good or bad, I'm simply pointing out that this is not a "use case" of NFTs.

I feel like that charity incentive still isn't nearly as strong as either 1) the clout, 2) the tax break or 3) just feeling good about themselves.

One thing that NFTs have taught me is that people love collectables. If that encourages more people to give then what's the problem?

Oh there's nothing wrong with it - and it might be (much like collectible pins[1]) that this is a thing that can help boost engagement in a profitable manner. But it's just "Gotta Catch'em All"-ism and I wouldn't say it's utterly without value - but there isn't a lot of value there.

1. https://store.penny-arcade.com/collections/pins