Great point. It's all about personal opinion. There are currently tons of organizations that enable people to fund a cause, but nearly none that let you fund something as specific as an individual treatment. We're providing a new, more direct and transparent, alternative.

Oftentimes there is institutional support for specific "mainstream" conditions (e.g. HIV, TB, etc.) and as a result, some patients who are in unique situations (e.g. have a rare condition, need a slightly expensive treatment, need referral care, etc.) often fall through the cracks. Watsi provides an opportunity to those patients by enabling them to tap into the crowd.

While there are pros and cons to each approach, it's important to note that they are complementary. Charitable giving is not a zero sum game, and we're working hard to expand the pie, not take a piece of it.

I wonder if everyone who has come across both options (broad vs. specific) choses one and sticks with that, or whether some people like both and split their donations?

While you'd obviously always prefer to expand the pie rather than just take a piece, there's nothing wrong with the latter - like you said, your approach can help people who slip through the gaps, so even if the pie doesn't expand, your taking a piece of it can still be a good thing.

Keep up the good work.

Great insight. We're in the process of creating a "General Fund" on Watsi to help us answer that very question.

Donors that are interested in maximizing impact, and not necessarily interested in helping a specific person, can give to that fund. We'll then use those donations to support organizational projects (e.g. $1 vaccinations and the like).

We're considering leveraging an organization like GiveWell to help us identify organizations and projects that will be beneficiaries of the general fund.

I'm the exact opposite, which is why I love Watsi and have donated even though I've never been a donating kind of person. I don't like giving money to something that feels abstract, where I don't really know how the money is being used for. I think what makes Watsi compelling is that we are supporting individual, specific people; solving a concrete, easily solvable problem (as opposed to, say, hunger, which requires more long term support); and lastly, the solution is low-cost, as opposed to hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars. The combination of these three factors is what I think makes Watsi a winning recipe that will entice people like myself who have always wanted to give but never felt comfortable with the current options of donation.

You don't really have to make a decision. Those you don't donate to receive donations from other people. Nothing to worry about I guess.

If you use the logic that it doesn't matter because other people will donate, that leaves me clear of ever donating to charity, safe in the knowledge that other people have got it covered. What a relief!