Surely the problem isn't the technology of the web, but getting the right people to do the talking so that they don't sound like robots? Maybe the answer is to rotate some of the PR team out to frontline activities periodically.

In the case of Dogs Trust, that's exactly what we've done. We prefer to have a conversation with our supporters and give them a person to respond to and talk to. Having said that, we are working on a redesign of our main site because we believe that it needs updating and some rearranging. This is not so much about the look as the ease of use. In that instance the investment is very much worth it as we want people to be able to find out more about what we do and how they can help as quickly and easily as possible.

As a user of virtual worlds, I'm encouraged by charities getting involved. Reaching people that you otherwise would miss - isn't that the point of using different methods of advertising?
Sure, the return from second life may be small. It may grow. It may not.
But the cost won't be very high and it is embracing a different method of advertising.

Come to think of it, how long has it been since people have said that charities aren't using the internet enough?

Besides the very limited use of second life, it also paves the way for other games in the future to consider allowing charities or other organisations to establish a prescence.
The online worlds between them have a higher population than some countries. Surely being able to reach a few million more people in the future for appeals or campaigning is worth checking into now?

Or should charities forget this new fangled idea of spending money to reach new supporters and simply stick to rattling tins on the street?