Ditto with David, Derek and Devin, a lot of this seems a bit unnecessarily rushed
On Feb 28, 12:16 pm, David Troy <davet...@gmail.com> wrote: > Devin -- > > Your approach is spot on and a step forward. > > Something will emerge structurally as we go forward and rushing into > something that doesn't serve a concrete need now is just not helpful or > necessary. > > As much as I support coworking, taking the time to be involved in a > non-profit takes time and from my point of view it's a tax on anyone who > wants to advance coworking, which is counterintuitive but in fact true. > > Why? Because I can't ignore it. If we were to go forward with an > organization or a conference now, I'd *have* to be involved in it. There may > be return later, but please don't tax me now; I just don't have time. > > We were able to do tax deductible donations for TEDxMidAtlantic through the > Baltimore Community Foundation. If we had been required to form a NP org for > TEDx donations, we probably wouldn't have done it. Working with an existing > nonprofit is a great way to save CPU cycles and accomplish more. > > Dave > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Devin <devinbalk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 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 <c...@thecreativespace.ca> 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 > > > >> de...@seasonalview.com > > > > >> 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 < > > rac...@camaraderie.ca> 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 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 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 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 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 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 athttp:// > > ... > > read more » -- 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.
