Originally Posted by KamuiRSX
Then you might want to take your statement and give it to the rest of the world because no offense, there are more people that don't care than there will ever be of people who do care. The fact is by what the OP asked. The answer is still no because there's no recognizable benefit to the donors. If you don't like it, change the world.
That's a naive outlook; if that measuring stick were applied to all human endeavor, civilization would grind to a halt and perish. The proper question is not, do more people care than not?, but: Do enough people care to make it worth happening? and is there enough of an audience to sustain the practice without being overly dependent on a few big pockets?
While the argument against using it to pad resumes has merit, the one dismissing teaching of classes does not, imho. There are *lots* of viable enterprises that are sustained by teaching people to teach others, and it may not turn joe sixpack into a Hardware Secrets ace reviewer, but familiarity with terminology, demystifying the art of computing as well as developing introductory skills into the art of overclocking/folding etc are useful additions.
I don't think I would pursue this without a clear framework dealing with the above factors, but the question of whether something is worth doing or not does not depend on majority rule, I would say. As you find in any business, there is the need to clearly identify supporters and leaders, get some idea of their quantities, develop ratios that would sustain the effort and extract out the growth curve to compare with other things going on. That's a lot of work, and out of my field of expertise. I assume others here may have ideas about this, hence the post.