Perhaps as a corporate structure, you are looking for the LLLC. Or the L3C -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L3C It gives the chance to do projects, be flexible, and yet still take funds from foundations. Another possibility is to look at this discussion as the beginnings of the "Coworking Trade Association", IE, the collection of all entities who are engaged in and who want to perpetuate and support and enhance coworking. That Trade Association type this is one of the different 501cX types, I forget if it is a 501c4 or a 501c6 In any case, realatively easy to set up, the only limitation is on writing off donations. If you don't care about that, then the cost of forming the entity goes way down. L3C's are new enough that they are not in every state. On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Tara Hunt <horsepig...@gmail.com> wrote: > Here is an idea: > > Years ago, Chris Messina (once again) had a post he put up about community > marks: > > http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2006/01/14/the-case-for-community-marks/ > > Rather than fitting ourselves uncomfortably into the current system (that > doesn't suit what we want to do), why don't we put our force behind creating > a new precedent? I spoke with a guy named Louis Villa (http://tieguy.org/) > who had worked with Lawrence Lessig on the Creative Commons project years > ago. I know he was quite interested in this idea (I showed him Chris' post). > > I won't get behind some org structure that we don't fit into, but I would > happily get behind setting a new precedent (would work for many projects > that have disparate stakeholders). > > T > > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Mike Schinkel < > mikeschin...@newclarity.net> wrote: > >> To continue my point, IndyHall existed as a non-entity (just a word, and a >> bunch of people spreading ideas) for a long time before we created any kind >> of legal entity, and that was because a commercial lease needed to be >> signed. There have been no commercial requirements to pull off anything >> (including the acquisition of a domain), and definitely not for spreading of >> ideas. >> >> >> Minimally an entity needs to exist to own the domain. Most likely it >> could be an endowed trust that has funds to pay for perpetual hosting. That >> way if you die or if you get sued to bankruptcy for whatever reason we don't >> loose the domain. >> >> >> Unless I miss my guess the domain is currently tied to you as a legal >> entity. If not, please explain how the community is protected in either of >> those two awful cases? >> >> >> In fact, the controlling nature of any singular entity (no matter how >> altruistic) would squash the growth potential that we've all benefited >> from. >> >> >> I'm not being sarcastic but reading that perspective from you and others I >> can't stop the premise of "Green Eggs and Ham" from running through my mind. >> It feels like rather than discuss what it might be and what value it might >> have that some are just reacting out of fear and thus are closing themselves >> off from even considering that there may be some value. Please don't take >> offense, I'm just explaining how it seems to me. >> >> >> As proposed the entity would only do those things we agreed to allow it to >> do. If there are things it would do that would "squash the growth potential >> that we've all benefited from" then we explicitly disallow those things in >> the bylaws without a supermajority or unanimous vote of members. >> >> >> One thing that *is* needed, and I'll stand firmly on this, is something we >> can point people to who want to understand what coworking is but who are not >> "true believers" like most on this list. For example, the media. Having the >> media right stories about coworking ends up having them define it for us >> whether we like it or not. I'd far rather we are in control of that >> definition and not others who couldn't be bothered to get it "right." >> >> >> -Mike Schinkel >> Ignition Alley Atlanta Coworking >> http://ignitionalley.com >> >> P.S. We can "define" it using principles and by giving examples, it >> doesn't have to be a single sentence. But it we do not define it others >> will. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Coworking" group. >> To post to this group, send email to cowork...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> coworking+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<coworking%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en. >> > > > > -- > tara 'missrogue' hunt > > Book: The Whuffie Factor (http://www.thewhuffiefactor.com) > Blog: HorsePigCow: Marketing Uncommon (http://horsepigcow.com) > Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/missrogue > phone: 514-679-2951 > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Coworking" group. > To post to this group, send email to cowork...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > coworking+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<coworking%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en. > -- John Sechrest . Corvallis Benton . Chamber Coalition . 420 NW 2nd . (541) 757-1507 . sechr...@corvallisedp.com . . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Coworking" group. To post to this group, send email to cowork...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to coworking+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en.
