We need to own coworking so no one can own it. That's my interpretation of this thread so far. I agree with this sentiment but I don't think we should be organizing structures around it.
Organizations will naturally emerge around our community's needs and one of them might grow into something that should ultimately 'own' coworking.com. I can't think of anyone better to control the site until then than Alex. A conference should take place soon: definitely before any long-term legal entities are formed. At this conference, we should solidify coworking principles and figure out how we can best serve the coworking community and world. I like the idea of organizing a conference under a coop but I don't know how that works. We can receive tax-deductible donations without forming a legal entity by becoming fiscally sponsored by a nonprofit organization whose mission aligns with the coworking movement. Fiscal sponsorship of a project will not give the nonprofit any legal right to or control of the project. It can be a clean process and I know interested nonprofits. There's a ton of great information about fiscal sponsorship here: http://www.fiscalsponsordirectory.org/resources.php On Feb 27, 9:19 pm, TCS <[email protected]> wrote: > I haven't had time to keep up with the whole discussion since the domain > purchase. I hope to engage a bit more ongoing. This is a good list Mike. > Let's continue to positively move ahead. > Peace! > > Chad > > On 2010-02-26, at 2:31 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote: > > > > > I'll come back to the issues that Alex threw out a while back, paraphrased. > > There are several issues/topics. > > > 1.) Recapitalizing the domain purchase. > > 2.) Protecting the domain (likely in a trust.) > > 3.) Long term management of domain (maybe a co-op, non-profit, simple LLC > > w/bylaws, or we can risk doing nothing.) > > 4.) Branding of "Coworking" so that we can promote it, help others market > > the concept, and help the "average joe(sephine)" to understand what it is > > and is not. > > 5.) Creating (some form of) an association that can provide services to > > member orgs, like negotiate for collective partnerships and discounts, etc. > > 6.) Running a conference (and I'd like this to be in the form of a co-op, > > even if the co-op lasts only for the length of each conference.) > > > There may be more, but there are at least these. Point of note, not > > everyone agrees with all these goals, some don't agree with any. But each > > issue can be addressed separately or some can be merged. Hopefully this > > list can help us identify what we are discussing in any given response on > > this list? > > > -Mike Schinkel > > Ignition Alley Atlanta Coworking > >http://ignitionalley.com > > > On Feb 26, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Derek Young wrote: > > >> I have been lurking on this conversation so far, but here are a few > >> thoughts: > > >> The greater the complexity of this organization, pseudo-organization, or > >> bank account, the less likely it is that the organization will represent > >> the greatest number of coworking spaces. > > >> 1. Keep it simple. Fine, we decide to organize in some way. This group is > >> extraordinarily diverse. Let's keep the organization as flat as possible, > >> be inclusive as possible, and only raise what we think we need for 1) the > >> objective or 2) a series of objectives + a small percentage contingency. > >> This prevents a hierarchy of spaces and people. This also means that there > >> isn't some big surplus of cashing sitting around in a bank account for us > >> to worry about. Should the group suddenly disappear, our greatest loss > >> would be trust and not money. One of Suite133's partners is president of > >> our local downtown business association. While very old school in > >> membership, the issues we're talking about are amazingly similar. > > >> 2. The right answer may be some form of non-profit / membership based > >> organization. Something that I don't think has been mentioned would be for > >> us to find a fiscal agent willing to handle our money and non-profit > >> status while we figure things out. Plus, we could, in theory, apply for > >> grants to support something like a conference. There are fees involved, > >> but it's a lot cheaper than incorporating - then changing our minds. > >> Shunpike.org, for example, does this for arts organizations in > >> Seattle/Tacoma and has been a regular user of Suite133 for nearly a year. > >> I used this model when setting up a new non-profit a few years ago in > >> partnership with our local community foundation. > > >> I just saw Alex's email ... I'll stop now and chime back in next week. > > >> Derek Young > >> Suite133 - Tacoma, WA > >> [email protected] > > >> On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:55 AM, Alex Hillman wrote: > > >>> If you're interested in creating an entity to help support the conference > >>> you want to run, then I say: do it! There are future endeavors that may > >>> even be able to find value in supporting or being a part of that > >>> supporting entity. But trying to make it an umbrella for EVERY possible > >>> thing that comes up in the future is not something I think is a mission I > >>> can support. > > >>> Mixing it in with the ownership of the domain, my tax liabilities, and > >>> the direction of the larger community is a different issue though, and > >>> one that the group does not seem to cohesively support, myself included. > > >>> None of us would be here having this conversation today if that's how > >>> this movement had started. > > >>> -Alex > > >>> /ah > >>> indyhall.org > >>> coworking in philadelphia > > >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:35 AM, rachel young <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > > >>> Exactly why do people want to set up a charitable organization? What > >>> would it get us? > > >>> Charitable organisations mean something different in some countries. In > >>> Canada, a charity is only one type of non-profit organisation, and is one > >>> that is more a stringent structure because it can issue tax receipts for > >>> donations. A corporation can still be a non-profit (one that operates for > >>> self-benefit and that redistributes surplus towards its goals) without > >>> being a charity. > > >>> I admit that I've been skimming some e-mails in the last few days. Did > >>> someone recommend an actual charity? Or do you mean to ask why people are > >>> interested in forming a non-profit? > > >>> I am in favour of forming some sort of organisation, traditional like a > >>> non-profit (but not a charity, I don't think we need charitable status) > >>> or co-operative, as a way of formalising all of us as a cohesive > >>> industry, as long as it is still a legal entity in some form. > > >>> The domain purchase is only one issue. There has been talk of a > >>> conference (which I still dig), leveraging our collective buying power, > >>> etc. These are all things that one cohesive body could do, and since > >>> there has been/could be money involved, it would keep it all legal and > >>> with checks and balances. Alex is the most awesome person to manage the > >>> domain issue, but I do worry if managing the funds could have any sort of > >>> negative taxation impact on him, which of course none of us would want. > >>> Forming a separate legal entity could solve/avoid just such an issue. > > >>> The buying of the domain was the first time that money has come into the > >>> equation and that was an anomaly IMO. > > >>> So then, what if something else comes up that involves money? How many > >>> times will there be an exception? Who knows if there will be a next > >>> time, but there also wasn't a first time until the domain issue came up, > >>> so it is possible. > >>> r. > > >>> -- > >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >>> "Coworking" group. > >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >>> [email protected]. > >>> For more options, visit this group > >>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en. > > >>> -- > >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >>> "Coworking" group. > >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >>> [email protected]. > >>> For more options, visit this group > >>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en. > > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >> "Coworking" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> [email protected]. > >> For more options, visit this group > >> athttp://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en. > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Coworking" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en. > > Chad Ballantyne > Creative Directorwww.thecreativespace.ca > 705.252.2423 > > ü Please consider the environment before printing this email. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Coworking" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en.
