To be clear, the badging idea isn't quite what I had in mind, but it does raise some interesting thoughts. The main problem is that there becomes an "issuing" body, which we're trying to avoid. That's the same problem as a license; it comes from an issuing body.
I'd like to see more people seeing, and embracing the values though. And if you go back to my original post, it's more about encouraging people to give back and participate, not just slap the word coworking on it and get some press. Not enforcing, but encouraging. Again, I don't know what that looks like just yet, but I'm all for keeping it far more lightweight than not. > I'd also like to decouple the money raising conversation from this > badge/license conversation as while I'm OK with the idea of a way to declare > our shared values, I don't want coworking.com to be a money making or > money collecting entity. *Completely* agreed. I didn't mean to bring them up in the same breath and confuse the issue, but I totally agree that coworking.com is a declaration, not a venture. -Alex /ah indyhall.org coworking in philadelphia On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Jacob Sayles <jsay...@gmail.com> wrote: > The biggest take away I've gathered from this discussion is that I'm > opposed to any kind of limiting or confining definition at a global level. > I've encountered spaces that claim to be coworking that I don't share their > values, and I've seen spaces that embody everything I believe in, but either > don't consider themselves coworking, or in the case of Think Space in > Redmond, they use the term Executive Suite to blend in better with the east > side mentality. Rather then focus on false positives and false negatives, I > instead choose to relax my need to have a "unifying" definition. This is > reenforced by looking at everything that has happened and how we've been > able to attract like minded people into our space simply by living our > values every day. I don't need words to tell me what that "magic" is and > I'd prefer to not muddy the definition by throwing words at it. > > So this badge/license idea... Part of me doesn't like it. That's the part > that wrote the above paragraph. But then I ask if there is a way to > structure something on a global level that doesn't impose a definition on > those opting in and doesn't exclude people who want to participate. It's a > slippery slope and one I'm reluctant to head down, especially with the > recent exchanges that have slashed my confidence that a global consensus can > be reached. But I'll entertain the idea further... > > Perhaps it could be as simple as if you make a public statement like > Citizen Space and Station C have made, you get a badge or something. > - http://citizenspace.us/about/our-philosophy/ > - http://station-c.com/en/community-manifesto > > I'd also like to decouple the money raising conversation from this > badge/license conversation as while I'm OK with the idea of a way to declare > our shared values, I don't want coworking.com to be a money making or > money collecting entity. > > Jacob > > --- > Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation > http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 > > > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Tara Hunt <horsepig...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Badges! We don't need no stinking... >> >> Actually I love this idea! >> >> typed choppily on my Nexus One.... >> >> On Mar 1, 2010 8:19 AM, "Tony Bacigalupo" <tonybacigal...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> I'm intrigued by the idea that someone can opt-in to the core values of >> coworking, in a way that if they didn't embody those core values it wouldn't >> make sense for them to use the license. >> >> So, for instance, say we had a Coworking Badge that anyone could download >> and use, and right on that image it says something like "We subscribe to the >> core values of Community, Openness, Collaboration, Accessibility, >> Sustainability," and it links back to coworking.com. >> >> That way, it would be difficult for someone to co-opt the term without >> misrepresenting themselves. If an exec suite wants to do coworking and would >> like to offer something that legitimately embodies those above values, then >> wonderful. >> >> Self-enforcement. >> >> >> > >> > On Mar 1, 2010 2:46 AM, "Mike Schinkel" <mikeschin...@newclarity.net> >> wrote: >> > >> >> > Hi Alex, >> > >> >> I like essence of the idea, but I can't see directly how to apply it. >> >> >> >> When I l... >> >> >> -Mike >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mar 1, 2010, at 1:40 AM, Alex Hillman wrote: >> > >> >> As you are envisioning it, what exactly would... >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Coworking" gro... >> To ... >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Coworking" group. >> T... >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
