No, it's not, it's not even negativity IMO, just realism.
If someone gives more than they can afford this time, or on a previous occasion, and doesn't see a 'payoff' from doing so, then they will have, from their perspective, have 'suffered' for nothing, they will have deprived themselves of something they needed, for nothing.
This is hardly an incentive to donate next time OMF does such a thing.
Encouraging people who have very limited resources, to give more than they afford, which seems to be the aim of such 3fer1's, simply to raise more money now, is a bad strategy, both in terms of the people they are taking this money now, and the long term survivability of the organisation doing so. IMO.
and what, in concrete terms, have we seen from OMF so far? Loads of emails, poorly presented, difficult to read, emails with little, if any, useful content, most of which are simply to inform people that someone they have never heard of has been appointed to a role that didn't exist last week.
This may be a useful approach in the US, it is less so in the UK, at least for me.