Jay, For the benefit of this discussion could you tell us how many members we've gained since the start of November, when we moved? That would help to put things in perspective.
On 24 January 2013 15:06, Jay Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > One last thing to add: It's is ridiculously early to say our > membership applications have plateaued. We've only had two meetings > since Christmas holidays, and we were doing fine attracting interest > in November and December. > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jay Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > Alternate title: "Keynesian economics in the context of a hackerspace" > > > > Let's not confuse macroeconomics with microeconomics. > > > > We're not a stable nation that can indefinitely incur debt to > > stimulate an economy. We're a hackerspace. Cool toys and equipment are > > great, but the most important thing for me to invest in is our > > members. Our members bring in new members, our members engage other > > members, our members bring in their own cool toys, and our members > > make each others lives all the more interesting by sharing the same > > space. > > > > How do I "invest" in members? > > How do I keep the budget process as fair to all members as possible? > > How do I ensure that members are getting what they pay for? > > > > By being as strictly and uncompromisingly libertarian as possible. > > > > Your membership fees are for things that we strictly need to spend > > money on to keep the space operational, nothing more and nothing less. > > Nobody will ever feel that their money is being undemocratically > > wasted because we're only spending it on things that are strictly > > necessary to keep the facility operational. If members want to buy > > cool things to make the place better, we encourage them to form teams > > to fund them. > > > > But what do I mean by investing in members? > > > > We're currently running a deficit but we haven't even considered > > raising membership dues (although the optional increased donations are > > great). In fact, lowering our dues to accommodate student members has > > been the best move for raising membership and income that we've made > > so far. By not jacking up fees, we can free members to invest their > > money into the space as they see fit and on their own terms. > > > > We all work together to build a better space. By being bold and not > > relying on a central committee to impose high dues and make financial > > decisions for us, we are all the more free and democratic for it. > > > > Mind you, in one months time our new treasurer might come along with a > > very different philosophy :) > > > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Justin Lacko <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The "official" policy of SkullSpace currently is that until we balance > our > >> budget, we can't spend on anything except the basics - such as rent and > >> power. This is a fiscally-conservative policy. I believe we need to > still > >> have nominal spending while operating at a deficit, for reasons which I > will > >> outline below. > >> > >> We are currently operating at a deficit. We can pay our bills each month > >> without a problem; we have three months of rent in our coffers. But our > >> monthly income is less than our expenses. The targeted fix for this > problem > >> is to increase membership through whatever means available, such as > >> advertising at conventions. > >> > >> When I worked on the plan for SkullSpace 2.0, I knew that we had to > expand > >> our membership base and ask for more money. Looking back since we moved > to > >> the new space at the beginning of December, we certainly have worked on > this > >> goal. Lately, it seems membership has again plateaued (I base this > >> observation on the fact that there haven't been any recent emails from > >> Courtney announcing new members). What I want to outline is that we > need to > >> continue to work on getting more members if we want to eliminate our > >> deficit. > >> > >> I think that our current fiscally-conservative spending policy is not > >> beneficial to the long-term goals of SkullSpace. I believe that right > now is > >> the most important time to be investing SkullSpace capital into the > space, > >> in creative ways that will bring in new members. The constant reminder > of > >> "we can't spend a penny until we break even each month" is not > encouraging > >> and dampens any creative thought for how SkullSpace can grow - because > >> sometimes ideas/things need money. I offer the example of our > now-defunct > >> monthly $100 prize to be awarded to a worthy member-nominated project. > While > >> we may not be able to afford $100 monthly now, we could bring it back > at $50 > >> each month, or a similar level. > >> > >> A basic projection, without knowing exact numbers, is that it will take > at > >> least 6 months or more to break even with our income and expenses, with > the > >> assumption that membership continues to grow. I don't think that we > should > >> wait until this time before spending money. While deficit spending is a > >> hotly-debated issue, it is beneficial as a means of injecting stimulus > in > >> order to continue growth in a stagnant economy. The current situation > is the > >> funding of a 3D printer for the space - much of which has graciously > been > >> funded by the membership. A 3D printer would arguably bring in more > members, > >> with the promise of using a novel machine as an added bonus to their > >> membership. A $100 donation from SkullSpace hardly seems harmful, and I > >> think that we are missing an opportunity to contribute to a really good > >> idea. > >> > >> I propose that we form a committee to assist with budgetary decisions, > as > >> Jay is stepping down at the next election, and make the entire process > much > >> more membership-oriented. The job of treasurer for a fledgling > organisation > >> is one with many duties, and understandably one person can easily get > burnt > >> out with it. I would volunteer to sit on this committee. Currently, our > >> funding decisions are resting with a single person, which is unfair and > does > >> not follow the SkullSpace mantra/rule of members having a say in the > running > >> of SkullSpace. > >> > >> I think that going-forward, SkullSpace is in a good position right now > and > >> we are slowly working towards our goal of breaking even and eventually > >> turning a profit. We need to continue to spend where members think it is > >> necessary or else we will surely stagnate. > >> > >> Please respond with opinions, criticisms, rebukes, death threats, etc., > but > >> I'm hoping to keep this discussion on-topic. > >> > >> ~Justin > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List > >> Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss > >> Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/ > _______________________________________________ > SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List > Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss > Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/ >
_______________________________________________ SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/
