[Noisebridge-discuss] meet tomorrow?

[Marc Powell]

here are my experiences with dealing with this before in newhackcity.. we
never ended up incorporating but we did have a pretty robust membership
model..

newhackcity 617:
  -group house in allston, ma
  -everybody who lived there paid rent and some were on the lease
  -members were people who lived there and hangers on, people could get
kicked out by either of these

nhc 415.1:
  -commercial warehouse space @ 20th/3rd in dogpatch
  -three peoples' names on the lease
  -members were people in the social network, no codification
  -people could get kicked out by members or leaseholders
  -leaseholders raised funds from other people who were using the space
for projects

nhc 415.2:
  -commercial space @ 6th/market, edge of soma/TL
  -three peoples' names on the lease- liability. we cycled people on and
off the lease when they left.
  -insurance in those three names.
  -interest-free checking account for member contributions
  -monthly meetings
  -membership was by invite-only and codified:
***
http://web.archive.org/web/20010628005801/www.newhackcity.net/policy.html
***
i recommend people check that out.. especially the three-tiered "member"
"contributor" and "guest" explanations under "affiliations".

that policy doc was a living thing- born from a bunch of painful
discussion meetings, ammendable, and built to withstand people taking
things over, ex-girlfriend/boyfriend drama, and members being dicks to
people.

and here's the newhack mission statement while we're at it:

http://web.archive.org/web/20010628003657/www.newhackcity.net/mission.html

R.I.P. NHC!!

noisebridge:
i know it takes a while to get things running, but if the only reason
we're meeting is to hash out an organizational document, that becomes less
fun then hanging out and hacking.. what is the cure for inertia?

best,
marc

On Tue, 27 May 2008, Al Billings wrote:

> Ben Henry wrote:
> > My $0.02 regarding donors:
> >
> > If you let them know up front what you're using the money for, keep
> > them in touch with how their money is being used (rent, equipment,
> > events, lectures, etc), then they have no reason to complain.  If you
> > let them know on day 1 what the risks are for them (wait..they're
> > donors, not investors), then they should have nothing to complain
> > about when the time comes and one of those risks happens (shit!).
> >
>
> Except these people aren't "donors" but are, instead, "members" of the
> organization, Noisebridge. Because of this and the money involved, it is
> reasonable to think that these people would expect some say in how the
> organization functions, not simply the hope that the (self-selected?)
> board does the right thing and that they can sue, as was suggested, if
> things go wrong.
>
> Al
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>