DaasYochid,
I just don’t think people should be publicly blasting this project simply because they don’t know who it is.
….
They’re not anonymous to anyone who does even a bit of research.
For the record, I don’t know who they are and tehrefore have nothing against them personally. However I am not blasting them simply because I don’t know who it is…it’s the other way around. If the name of the head of the organization was made public and he/she had personal credibility then I would maybe ask less questions. Now that there is nobody openly standing behind the organization I don’t see any reason to trust them.
Your posts on other topics have given me the impression that you’re a talmid chacham. Is there an inyan of being dan lekaf zechus a nameless anonymous organization? I would think not.
Fine print? There was a contract?
I happen to agree that not paying shadchanim from the previous initiative is bad PR for this one, but they are totally different. The first one had NASI paying from their own (fund-raised) money, which they ran out of.
This one is entrusting them with private money put in escrow.
I didn’t mean literally fine print on a contact. I meant that people trusted NASI’s ads that they would pay but somewhere along the way there were conditions that allowed them off the hook. It makes people want to ask every possible question this time around and not make any assumptions.
My examples may have been bad examples, but the point I was trying to make is that you have to admit that there will be cases where there will be disputes, if not in the cases I mentioned then in some other cases. AZ mentioned that they have dayanim for arbitration, but at that point the girl or her parents are trying to get money back that is no longer in escrow so the burden of proof is on them, not on NASI. There do not seem to be any safeguards preventing the money from being removed from escrow prior to resolving the dispute.