It can be considered rude... see the section at the end here:
http://www.linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/index.php?page=netiquette
The author of that section should probably read Immanuel Kant before putting forward his moral statements, otherwise he may be seen as a master oppressing the slaves, I mean, oppressing the people needing help.
[Kant is no easy reading in general as far as I can tell, even for native speakers. Lots of room for interpretation... ]
This discussion is becoming rather philosophic and Philosophy is not quite the topic of the list. So, to avoid noise for other people on the list, I suggest that this discussion turns private, in case you want to carry on with it. However, I would like to remark that, to my view, an act can only be generous if it is unconditional and I would also like to say that, ingeneral, people are better persuaded with reasons instead of being threated. Since you find Kant difficult to read, I suggest you the following short and easy text (in the circumstance you are interested in it) on generosity written by Leibniz, which closely expresses my point of view regarding the matter in debate.
http://philosophy2.ucsd.edu/~rutherford/Leibniz/generos.htm
Paul
_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo
