That money will be blown on hookers, most likely.
I don't usually get a say in what happens to my money once it leaves my pocket, I also apparently don't have the information you have, but if I did, I'm not sure it would change my decision.
Is the current Snopes team known for their purchasing of hookers? That's also totally legal in lots of places, again, not that I care.
What point are you trying to make?
The point I am making is that Snopes was/is horribly mis-managed and should not be given any money. Don't waste your money on fools.
Snopes at its heart is compromised.
Also, this sounds super speculative. As far as I can tell David Mikkelson has been accused of these things, by his former wife. They may be true, but I don't have any evidence of that, I'm especially sensitive to the fact that in a situation like a messy divorce, lots of bad things start flying around.
I couldn't find any of this coming to a legal conclusion that indicates the above accusations were true. It seems like it would be easy to show if he used company funds for personal trips, etc... the cheating/prostitute purchases probably harder to prove.
I'd be curious to know how you buy anything if you can't spend money at places where adulterers work. I acknowledge that's kind of a sarcastic question, but it seems like you have more of a problem with Snopes than the owner, which is fair (but I acknowledge I'm putting words into your mouth and don't intend to walk away from this believing my assumption).