I'm still going to close up the brainstorm (since we've had at least a couple of good ideas) at 5pm EST today for the funds redistribution, and will re-post the ideas that I got. If you've got something specifically related to how funds are collected, and how the funders are rewarded, *today's the day*.
But the real reason for this post: I was doing some digging into my own personal archives, and found an 22 month old post of mine, from back when this list was a mere 1000 people. Ha. http://dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/06/its-about-giving-back-this-time/ Please read it before continuing this post. If you're not going to read the whole thing, I'd ask that you consider these excerpts: When I describe the beauty of the coworking movement to someone, it goes something like this: Coworking isn’t really a franchise, but it’s sort of an open source franchise. I say that in the capacity that there is no monetary buy in to participate in the community, and yet, you’ve got the experiences (successes and failures) of everyone before you to work with. We’ve got a wickedly strong toolbox, and you can have it. At this stage in the game, with all of the press, you’ve got a very strong brand and high rate of press visiblity to work with. You can use whatever you want. It’s here *for you*. All we ask is that as you grow, learn, and achieve, *you remember where you started and keep us posted*. This isn’t just for us, cuz we’re going to do it too. It’s for the generations to come, as the movement grows, morphs, and evolves. So if it seems a little absurd that I’m freaking out about people branding themselves as “coworking” and not contributing to the list (or any visible forum), you see what I’m getting at? --------------------------------------------- In the case of coworking that I’m trying to illustrate, it’s about representation. I’m not asking for a financial buy in to use the brand “coworking” (if anybody should, it’d be Brad Neuberg, but even he doesn’t want that from you). The fact that Brad has only ever asked that his name be attributed as the origin of the word as related to this movement is key, and I understand his reasoning completely: the success of the movement that contributed groundwork to is a crucial part of his C.V., and when he gets around to his next big idea, it’s important that his attribution in the coworking history books is present. Attribution. Linkbacks. A track record for, and of, sharing. This is all really, really important or else the whole thing risks toppling in on itself. ------------------------- *What would a coworking license look like?* I’m not totally sure yet. I know I’m not interested in restriction, since that would be entirely counter to the principles of the movement. I’m just looking at little things to help *enforce reciprocity*. Am I interested in policing such a thing? Of course not. But if there’s something on paper, misunderstandings can be dealt with. -------------------------- And really, all I want is to help give back even a little piece of what I’ve gotten from this community. As the movement grows, those expectations need to be set forth clearly. -------------------------- And since that’s *what we want* with coworking (more people to experiment on the model and link back to their inspirations, as well as provide new inspirations), I think that could be helpful. I know not everyone thinks about giving back, and if you require people to, you’ll always be disappointed. That’s the unfortunate reality. I accept that. I think we’re lucky to be part of a community where the leeching is still the less-common situation. But as the movement grows more and more, the opportunities for exploit increase. -------------------------- I didn't push the idea at the time, but was more watching patterns and getting frustrated. Some of those patterns have evolved, and brought us to where we are today. <http://dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/06/its-about-giving-back-this-time/> I'd like to offer the idea that's more lightweight than the organizations that have been proposed. The thing we've really been talking about is ironing out the expectations associated with coworking, and largely, tying them back to core values somehow. The problems with organizations are many, and something I'm not interested in debating here. What I'm curious, legitimately curious because I don't have enough knowledge to back up successful or failed models, is the idea of using something like a license to unify us and set expectations. Not like a drivers license, but like a software license. One that encourages sharing, reciprocity, building market value, and ultimately, more knowledge capital along with the word "coworking" and its associated ideas. The downsides to this, of course, are that software licenses themselves have a bit of a holy war background to them, and that they're complicated to understand. Such is legal. The upside is, it addresses some unity and usage with the word coworking, which we all value enough to have spent the last 3 weeks discussing a domain and its implications on the list. I don't know if this idea has legs, and love to open up the floor for founded discussion. /ah indyhall.org coworking in philadelphia -- 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.
