Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour]

Wow
This is an amazing story Graziano!
Thanks for sharing.
:)

On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 12:17 PM Graziano Milano via NetBehaviour <
netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I’m actively involved with Rural Urban Synthesis Society (RUSS)
>  which is a members-led Community Land Trust
> based in Lewisham (South East London), founded in 2009 with the aim of
> creating sustainable community-led neighbourhoods and truly affordable
> homes.
>
> It was a long and hard journey for us, but in June 2018 our first housing
> project was finally granted planning permission by Lewisham Council and
> soon after that we managed to get a £988k pre-development grant from the
> Mayor of London. Our story started a few years earlier when, after a
> campaign led by RUSS members, we successfully completed a public
> procurement process and signed a Development Agreement in April 2016 with
> Lewisham Council for a ‘community-led, affordable, self-build housing
> development’ in a derelict former school and industrial site at Church
> Grove in Ladywell, South East London.
>
> The project will provide 33 new sustainable, customised, high quality
> homes (including 5 social housing) that will be permanently affordable and
> partly self-built in order to reduce construction costs. Have a read at the 
> Innovative
> Approach to Community-Led Housing
> 
> brochure (which I designed) for more detailed info about RUSS’s vision.
>
> In summer 2017, I also successfully led a Spacehive crowdfunding campaign
>  to raise £50k+ to
> self-build (this summer) a community hub on the same site as a training
> facility for would-be community self-builders (may well be used for
> community arts projects as well). If you wish to find more about it, you
> can book a free ticket for the RUSS Community Hub - Build Launch Event
> 
> on Wednesday 15th May.
>
> Graziano
>
> On Fri, 3 May 2019 at 10:31, Tom Keene  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> Interesting thread.
>>
>> On Cressingham Gardens Estate where I live, we're currently setting up
>> our own tenant management organisation and explored a coop option, but as
>> we have a very complex relationship with Lambeth Council (i.e intention to
>> demolish through regeneration) the coop structure didn't seem to fit. We
>> are now about to become a Community Interest Company (CIC).
>>
>> Interestingly, Lambeth appointed itself as the UK's first 'cooperative
>> council' though in reality this is meaningless. When housing officers
>> attempted to enact a cooperative approach they didn't have a clue what it
>> meant in practice, and said as much. The officers (and councillors)
>> practice is based around tight control of information through existing
>> technical systems, though they don't particularly recognise the role of
>> technology. Weirdly, Lambeth Labour party councillors partnered and
>> campaigned under a joint Labour/Coopertive Party banner. In other words,
>> they co-opted (I do like a pun;) the term cooperative to make their
>> policies of social cleaning through urban regeneration more palatable.
>>
>> What I've learnt through my experience of housing activism (trying to
>> stop a council demolishing my home) is that multiple organisational
>> structures are required to intervene in, alter, or instigate new power
>> dynamics. On Cressingham, for example, there's a Residents Association,
>> Community Interest company, Save Cressingham Campaign (organised around an
>> anarchist model), and a formal council structure based on a written
>> constitution. Each of which presents different possibilities of action -
>> you need this fluidity or ability to participate in different structures to
>> address a problems from multiple, simultaneous, directions. This
>> multiplicity is required because they things we are dealing undergo
>> constant change which is a central problem of capitalism... Can you tell
>> i'm in the middle of my PhD writeup  ;)
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 2 May 2019, at 10:06 PM, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
>>
>> Dear Julian,
>>
>> It's great to hear that you have finally got some traction for the
>> development work that you want to do. I would be v. interested to hear how
>> it goes.
>>
>> I've been interested in cooperatives as one (incomplete and partial I
>> know) route to democratising work and money flows - following the debates
>> around platform cooperatives, open cooperatives, and the Preston model
>> (where the local authority has committed to favouring local and
>> cooperatively run services in public procurement decisions, with great
>> benefits to the local economy).
>>
>> I've followed the rocky journey of Resonate to build a blockchain-based
>> cooperative music service.

Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour]

Hi Tom,
Ah! the need for a multiplicity of forms for action and organising is so
interesting.

We have been running the DAOWO labs for a couple of years, to bring
critical attention to the potential impacts of Decentralised Autonomous
Organisations on the blockchain. We ran one on "Doing Good
" and what you say
confirms one of the main things that I learned. This was around the limits
of good ideas, tools, mechanisms and even laws, to support action and
organisation without communities and their ecosystems.

However it does seem odd that coops should not be more easily formed,
recognised and integrated in cultural and community contexts. Why was it
not the right form of organisation for campaigning?

cheers!
Ruth


On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 10:31 AM Tom Keene 
wrote:

> Hi all,
> Interesting thread.
>
> On Cressingham Gardens Estate where I live, we're currently setting up our
> own tenant management organisation and explored a coop option, but as we
> have a very complex relationship with Lambeth Council (i.e intention to
> demolish through regeneration) the coop structure didn't seem to fit. We
> are now about to become a Community Interest Company (CIC).
>
> Interestingly, Lambeth appointed itself as the UK's first 'cooperative
> council' though in reality this is meaningless. When housing officers
> attempted to enact a cooperative approach they didn't have a clue what it
> meant in practice, and said as much. The officers (and councillors)
> practice is based around tight control of information through existing
> technical systems, though they don't particularly recognise the role of
> technology. Weirdly, Lambeth Labour party councillors partnered and
> campaigned under a joint Labour/Coopertive Party banner. In other words,
> they co-opted (I do like a pun;) the term cooperative to make their
> policies of social cleaning through urban regeneration more palatable.
>
> What I've learnt through my experience of housing activism (trying to stop
> a council demolishing my home) is that multiple organisational structures
> are required to intervene in, alter, or instigate new power dynamics. On
> Cressingham, for example, there's a Residents Association, Community
> Interest company, Save Cressingham Campaign (organised around an anarchist
> model), and a formal council structure based on a written constitution.
> Each of which presents different possibilities of action - you need this
> fluidity or ability to participate in different structures to address a
> problems from multiple, simultaneous, directions. This multiplicity is
> required because they things we are dealing undergo constant change which
> is a central problem of capitalism... Can you tell i'm in the middle of my
> PhD writeup  ;)
>
> Tom
>
>
> On Thu, 2 May 2019, at 10:06 PM, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
>
> Dear Julian,
>
> It's great to hear that you have finally got some traction for the
> development work that you want to do. I would be v. interested to hear how
> it goes.
>
> I've been interested in cooperatives as one (incomplete and partial I
> know) route to democratising work and money flows - following the debates
> around platform cooperatives, open cooperatives, and the Preston model
> (where the local authority has committed to favouring local and
> cooperatively run services in public procurement decisions, with great
> benefits to the local economy).
>
> I've followed the rocky journey of Resonate to build a blockchain-based
> cooperative music service. And what I know of their experience chimes with
> the article when it says...
>
> "cooperatives are more difficult to bootstrap than corporations because
> they don’t have access to the same capital markets. Historically, it’s been
> a lot harder to coordinate investment from members with shared values than
> it is to raise funds with the singular goal of maximizing profits"
>
> We have often entertained formalising more cooperative organisational
> forms for Furtherfield projects, but have been put off by the
> administrative overheads and legal complexities and costs. The potential
> for DAOs to lighten the bureaucratic load is therefore very attractive!
>
> Look forward to hearing more about CoopDAO
> :)
> Ruth
>
>
>
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, 10:39 Julian Brooks,  wrote:
>
> Hey Ruth,
>
> Yeah I also found that article of interest too.
> Insight from VC's, who'd a thunk it.
>
> I've been digging into Coops for the last couple of years. For me stems
> from a visceral reaction to DAO's & 'Code as Law'. I just immediately
> thought it'd be better to consider them more human-centric - with DAO's
> being such a potential for collectivising power.
>
> So started putting this kinda mental construct together 'Cooperative
> Autonomous Organisations', a sort of 'DAO, Coop, Mutual, Union' - type
> structure. This was to house the participants in the music licensing /
> smart contracts / IP-reinvention post-doc project that I hav

Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Graziano Milano via NetBehaviour]

Yes, Amanda is part of it.

On Fri, 3 May 2019 at 13:35, Tom Keene  wrote:

> Ahh, I believe a very old friend of mine (Amanda Getrup) is building with
> you on Church Grove...
> Thanks for sharing the event details!
> T
>
>
> On Fri, 3 May 2019, at 12:17 PM, Graziano Milano via NetBehaviour wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I’m actively involved with Rural Urban Synthesis Society (RUSS)
>  which is a members-led Community Land Trust
> based in Lewisham (South East London), founded in 2009 with the aim of
> creating sustainable community-led neighbourhoods and truly affordable
> homes.
>
> It was a long and hard journey for us, but in June 2018 our first housing
> project was finally granted planning permission by Lewisham Council and
> soon after that we managed to get a £988k pre-development grant from the
> Mayor of London. Our story started a few years earlier when, after a
> campaign led by RUSS members, we successfully completed a public
> procurement process and signed a Development Agreement in April 2016 with
> Lewisham Council for a ‘community-led, affordable, self-build housing
> development’ in a derelict former school and industrial site at Church
> Grove in Ladywell, South East London.
>
> The project will provide 33 new sustainable, customised, high quality
> homes (including 5 social housing) that will be permanently affordable and
> partly self-built in order to reduce construction costs. Have a read at the 
> Innovative
> Approach to Community-Led Housing
> 
> brochure (which I designed) for more detailed info about RUSS’s vision.
>
> In summer 2017, I also successfully led a Spacehive crowdfunding campaign
>  to raise £50k+ to
> self-build (this summer) a community hub on the same site as a training
> facility for would-be community self-builders (may well be used for
> community arts projects as well). If you wish to find more about it, you
> can book a free ticket for the RUSS Community Hub - Build Launch Event
> 
> on Wednesday 15th May.
>
> Graziano
>
> On Fri, 3 May 2019 at 10:31, Tom Keene  wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
> Interesting thread.
>
> On Cressingham Gardens Estate where I live, we're currently setting up our
> own tenant management organisation and explored a coop option, but as we
> have a very complex relationship with Lambeth Council (i.e intention to
> demolish through regeneration) the coop structure didn't seem to fit. We
> are now about to become a Community Interest Company (CIC).
>
> Interestingly, Lambeth appointed itself as the UK's first 'cooperative
> council' though in reality this is meaningless. When housing officers
> attempted to enact a cooperative approach they didn't have a clue what it
> meant in practice, and said as much. The officers (and councillors)
> practice is based around tight control of information through existing
> technical systems, though they don't particularly recognise the role of
> technology. Weirdly, Lambeth Labour party councillors partnered and
> campaigned under a joint Labour/Coopertive Party banner. In other words,
> they co-opted (I do like a pun;) the term cooperative to make their
> policies of social cleaning through urban regeneration more palatable.
>
> What I've learnt through my experience of housing activism (trying to stop
> a council demolishing my home) is that multiple organisational structures
> are required to intervene in, alter, or instigate new power dynamics. On
> Cressingham, for example, there's a Residents Association, Community
> Interest company, Save Cressingham Campaign (organised around an anarchist
> model), and a formal council structure based on a written constitution.
> Each of which presents different possibilities of action - you need this
> fluidity or ability to participate in different structures to address a
> problems from multiple, simultaneous, directions. This multiplicity is
> required because they things we are dealing undergo constant change which
> is a central problem of capitalism... Can you tell i'm in the middle of my
> PhD writeup  ;)
>
> Tom
>
>
> On Thu, 2 May 2019, at 10:06 PM, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
>
> Dear Julian,
>
> It's great to hear that you have finally got some traction for the
> development work that you want to do. I would be v. interested to hear how
> it goes.
>
> I've been interested in cooperatives as one (incomplete and partial I
> know) route to democratising work and money flows - following the debates
> around platform cooperatives, open cooperatives, and the Preston model
> (where the local authority has committed to favouring local and
> cooperatively run services in public procurement decisions, with great
> benefits to the local economy).
>
> I've followed the rocky 

Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Tom Keene]

Ahh, I believe a very old friend of mine (Amanda Getrup) is building with you 
on Church Grove...
Thanks for sharing the event details!
T 


On Fri, 3 May 2019, at 12:17 PM, Graziano Milano via NetBehaviour wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I’m actively involved with Rural Urban Synthesis Society (RUSS) 
>  which is a members-led Community Land Trust based 
> in Lewisham (South East London), founded in 2009 with the aim of creating 
> sustainable community-led neighbourhoods and truly affordable homes.
> 
> It was a long and hard journey for us, but in June 2018 our first housing 
> project was finally granted planning permission by Lewisham Council and soon 
> after that we managed to get a £988k pre-development grant from the Mayor of 
> London. Our story started a few years earlier when, after a campaign led by 
> RUSS members, we successfully completed a public procurement process and 
> signed a Development Agreement in April 2016 with Lewisham Council for a 
> ‘community-led, affordable, self-build housing development’ in a derelict 
> former school and industrial site at Church Grove in Ladywell, South East 
> London. 
> 
> The project will provide 33 new sustainable, customised, high quality homes 
> (including 5 social housing) that will be permanently affordable and partly 
> self-built in order to reduce construction costs. Have a read at the 
> Innovative Approach to Community-Led Housing 
>  brochure 
> (which I designed) for more detailed info about RUSS’s vision. 
> 
> In summer 2017, I also successfully led a Spacehive crowdfunding campaign 
>  to raise £50k+ to self-build 
> (this summer) a community hub on the same site as a training facility for 
> would-be community self-builders (may well be used for community arts 
> projects as well). If you wish to find more about it, you can book a free 
> ticket for the RUSS Community Hub - Build Launch Event 
> 
>  on Wednesday 15th May. 
> 
> Graziano
> 
> On Fri, 3 May 2019 at 10:31, Tom Keene  wrote:
>> __
>> Hi all, 
>> Interesting thread. 
>> 
>> On Cressingham Gardens Estate where I live, we're currently setting up our 
>> own tenant management organisation and explored a coop option, but as we 
>> have a very complex relationship with Lambeth Council (i.e intention to 
>> demolish through regeneration) the coop structure didn't seem to fit. We are 
>> now about to become a Community Interest Company (CIC).
>> 
>> Interestingly, Lambeth appointed itself as the UK's first 'cooperative 
>> council' though in reality this is meaningless. When housing officers 
>> attempted to enact a cooperative approach they didn't have a clue what it 
>> meant in practice, and said as much. The officers (and councillors) practice 
>> is based around tight control of information through existing technical 
>> systems, though they don't particularly recognise the role of technology. 
>> Weirdly, Lambeth Labour party councillors partnered and campaigned under a 
>> joint Labour/Coopertive Party banner. In other words, they co-opted (I do 
>> like a pun;) the term cooperative to make their policies of social cleaning 
>> through urban regeneration more palatable. 
>> 
>> What I've learnt through my experience of housing activism (trying to stop a 
>> council demolishing my home) is that multiple organisational structures are 
>> required to intervene in, alter, or instigate new power dynamics. On 
>> Cressingham, for example, there's a Residents Association, Community 
>> Interest company, Save Cressingham Campaign (organised around an anarchist 
>> model), and a formal council structure based on a written constitution. Each 
>> of which presents different possibilities of action - you need this fluidity 
>> or ability to participate in different structures to address a problems from 
>> multiple, simultaneous, directions. This multiplicity is required because 
>> they things we are dealing undergo constant change which is a central 
>> problem of capitalism... Can you tell i'm in the middle of my PhD writeup ;)
>> 
>> Tom 
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, 2 May 2019, at 10:06 PM, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
>>> Dear Julian,
>>> 
>>> It's great to hear that you have finally got some traction for the 
>>> development work that you want to do. I would be v. interested to hear how 
>>> it goes.
>>> 
>>> I've been interested in cooperatives as one (incomplete and partial I know) 
>>> route to democratising work and money flows - following the debates around 
>>> platform cooperatives, open cooperatives, and the Preston model (where the 
>>> local authority has committed to favouring local and cooperatively run 
>>> services in public procurement decisions, with great benefits to the local 
>>>

Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Graziano Milano via NetBehaviour]

Hello,

I’m actively involved with Rural Urban Synthesis Society (RUSS)
 which is a members-led Community Land Trust based
in Lewisham (South East London), founded in 2009 with the aim of creating
sustainable community-led neighbourhoods and truly affordable homes.

It was a long and hard journey for us, but in June 2018 our first housing
project was finally granted planning permission by Lewisham Council and
soon after that we managed to get a £988k pre-development grant from the
Mayor of London. Our story started a few years earlier when, after a
campaign led by RUSS members, we successfully completed a public
procurement process and signed a Development Agreement in April 2016 with
Lewisham Council for a ‘community-led, affordable, self-build housing
development’ in a derelict former school and industrial site at Church
Grove in Ladywell, South East London.

The project will provide 33 new sustainable, customised, high quality homes
(including 5 social housing) that will be permanently affordable and partly
self-built in order to reduce construction costs. Have a read at the Innovative
Approach to Community-Led Housing

brochure (which I designed) for more detailed info about RUSS’s vision.

In summer 2017, I also successfully led a Spacehive crowdfunding campaign
 to raise £50k+ to self-build
(this summer) a community hub on the same site as a training facility for
would-be community self-builders (may well be used for community arts
projects as well). If you wish to find more about it, you can book a free
ticket for the RUSS Community Hub - Build Launch Event

on Wednesday 15th May.

Graziano

On Fri, 3 May 2019 at 10:31, Tom Keene  wrote:

> Hi all,
> Interesting thread.
>
> On Cressingham Gardens Estate where I live, we're currently setting up our
> own tenant management organisation and explored a coop option, but as we
> have a very complex relationship with Lambeth Council (i.e intention to
> demolish through regeneration) the coop structure didn't seem to fit. We
> are now about to become a Community Interest Company (CIC).
>
> Interestingly, Lambeth appointed itself as the UK's first 'cooperative
> council' though in reality this is meaningless. When housing officers
> attempted to enact a cooperative approach they didn't have a clue what it
> meant in practice, and said as much. The officers (and councillors)
> practice is based around tight control of information through existing
> technical systems, though they don't particularly recognise the role of
> technology. Weirdly, Lambeth Labour party councillors partnered and
> campaigned under a joint Labour/Coopertive Party banner. In other words,
> they co-opted (I do like a pun;) the term cooperative to make their
> policies of social cleaning through urban regeneration more palatable.
>
> What I've learnt through my experience of housing activism (trying to stop
> a council demolishing my home) is that multiple organisational structures
> are required to intervene in, alter, or instigate new power dynamics. On
> Cressingham, for example, there's a Residents Association, Community
> Interest company, Save Cressingham Campaign (organised around an anarchist
> model), and a formal council structure based on a written constitution.
> Each of which presents different possibilities of action - you need this
> fluidity or ability to participate in different structures to address a
> problems from multiple, simultaneous, directions. This multiplicity is
> required because they things we are dealing undergo constant change which
> is a central problem of capitalism... Can you tell i'm in the middle of my
> PhD writeup  ;)
>
> Tom
>
>
> On Thu, 2 May 2019, at 10:06 PM, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
>
> Dear Julian,
>
> It's great to hear that you have finally got some traction for the
> development work that you want to do. I would be v. interested to hear how
> it goes.
>
> I've been interested in cooperatives as one (incomplete and partial I
> know) route to democratising work and money flows - following the debates
> around platform cooperatives, open cooperatives, and the Preston model
> (where the local authority has committed to favouring local and
> cooperatively run services in public procurement decisions, with great
> benefits to the local economy).
>
> I've followed the rocky journey of Resonate to build a blockchain-based
> cooperative music service. And what I know of their experience chimes with
> the article when it says...
>
> "cooperatives are more difficult to bootstrap than corporations because
> they don’t have access to the same capital markets. Historically, it’s been
> a lot harder to coordinate investment from members with shared va

Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Tom Keene]

Hi all, 
Interesting thread. 

On Cressingham Gardens Estate where I live, we're currently setting up our own 
tenant management organisation and explored a coop option, but as we have a 
very complex relationship with Lambeth Council (i.e intention to demolish 
through regeneration) the coop structure didn't seem to fit. We are now about 
to become a Community Interest Company (CIC).

Interestingly, Lambeth appointed itself as the UK's first 'cooperative council' 
though in reality this is meaningless. When housing officers attempted to enact 
a cooperative approach they didn't have a clue what it meant in practice, and 
said as much. The officers (and councillors) practice is based around tight 
control of information through existing technical systems, though they don't 
particularly recognise the role of technology. Weirdly, Lambeth Labour party 
councillors partnered and campaigned under a joint Labour/Coopertive Party 
banner. In other words, they co-opted (I do like a pun;) the term cooperative 
to make their policies of social cleaning through urban regeneration more 
palatable. 

What I've learnt through my experience of housing activism (trying to stop a 
council demolishing my home) is that multiple organisational structures are 
required to intervene in, alter, or instigate new power dynamics. On 
Cressingham, for example, there's a Residents Association, Community Interest 
company, Save Cressingham Campaign (organised around an anarchist model), and a 
formal council structure based on a written constitution. Each of which 
presents different possibilities of action - you need this fluidity or ability 
to participate in different structures to address a problems from multiple, 
simultaneous, directions. This multiplicity is required because they things we 
are dealing undergo constant change which is a central problem of capitalism... 
Can you tell i'm in the middle of my PhD writeup ;)

Tom 


On Thu, 2 May 2019, at 10:06 PM, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
> Dear Julian,
> 
> It's great to hear that you have finally got some traction for the 
> development work that you want to do. I would be v. interested to hear how it 
> goes.
> 
> I've been interested in cooperatives as one (incomplete and partial I know) 
> route to democratising work and money flows - following the debates around 
> platform cooperatives, open cooperatives, and the Preston model (where the 
> local authority has committed to favouring local and cooperatively run 
> services in public procurement decisions, with great benefits to the local 
> economy).
> 
> I've followed the rocky journey of Resonate to build a blockchain-based 
> cooperative music service. And what I know of their experience chimes with 
> the article when it says...
> 
> "cooperatives are more difficult to bootstrap than corporations because they 
> don’t have access to the same capital markets. Historically, it’s been a lot 
> harder to coordinate investment from members with shared values than it is to 
> raise funds with the singular goal of maximizing profits"
> 
> We have often entertained formalising more cooperative organisational forms 
> for Furtherfield projects, but have been put off by the administrative 
> overheads and legal complexities and costs. The potential for DAOs to lighten 
> the bureaucratic load is therefore very attractive!
> 
> Look forward to hearing more about CoopDAO
> :)
> Ruth
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, 10:39 Julian Brooks,  wrote:
>> Hey Ruth,
>> 
>>  Yeah I also found that article of interest too.
>>  Insight from VC's, who'd a thunk it.
>> 
>>  I've been digging into Coops for the last couple of years. For me stems 
>>  from a visceral reaction to DAO's & 'Code as Law'. I just immediately 
>>  thought it'd be better to consider them more human-centric - with DAO's 
>>  being such a potential for collectivising power.
>> 
>>  So started putting this kinda mental construct together 'Cooperative 
>>  Autonomous Organisations', a sort of 'DAO, Coop, Mutual, Union' - type 
>>  structure. This was to house the participants in the music licensing / 
>>  smart contracts / IP-reinvention post-doc project that I have been 
>>  attempting to raise research funding for (unsuccessfully so far).
>> 
>>  I always thought the CoAO would be the trickiest part to put together, 
>>  and was actually planning to work in this during years 3-5 in a 5yr 
>>  project. After getting rejected for funding last October (working w. 
>>  UoMcr proposing to AHRC) I started exploring and getting involved with 
>>  the 'Aragon Project' community (cool people with some astonishing [& 
>>  really-existing] crypto tech-tools).
>> 
>>  A small Aragon group started seriously considering and engaging in what 
>>  a Cooperative DAO could be in practice. To this end I put togehter a 
>>  small funding proposal that was voted though by $ANT holders (the Aragon 
>>  token) a couple of days ago (whoop whoop!). So there'll be two of us 
>>  working a 

Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour]

Dear Julian,

It's great to hear that you have finally got some traction for the
development work that you want to do. I would be v. interested to hear how
it goes.

I've been interested in cooperatives as one (incomplete and partial I know)
route to democratising work and money flows - following the debates around
platform cooperatives, open cooperatives, and the Preston model (where the
local authority has committed to favouring local and cooperatively run
services in public procurement decisions, with great benefits to the local
economy).

I've followed the rocky journey of Resonate to build a blockchain-based
cooperative music service. And what I know of their experience chimes with
the article when it says...

"cooperatives are more difficult to bootstrap than corporations because
they don’t have access to the same capital markets. Historically, it’s been
a lot harder to coordinate investment from members with shared values than
it is to raise funds with the singular goal of maximizing profits"

We have often entertained formalising more cooperative organisational forms
for Furtherfield projects, but have been put off by the administrative
overheads and legal complexities and costs. The potential for DAOs to
lighten the bureaucratic load is therefore very attractive!

Look forward to hearing more about CoopDAO
:)
Ruth



On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, 10:39 Julian Brooks,  wrote:

> Hey Ruth,
>
> Yeah I also found that article of interest too.
> Insight from VC's, who'd a thunk it.
>
> I've been digging into Coops for the last couple of years. For me stems
> from a visceral reaction to DAO's & 'Code as Law'. I just immediately
> thought it'd be better to consider them more human-centric - with DAO's
> being such a potential for collectivising power.
>
> So started putting this kinda mental construct together 'Cooperative
> Autonomous Organisations', a sort of 'DAO, Coop, Mutual, Union' - type
> structure. This was to house the participants in the music licensing /
> smart contracts / IP-reinvention post-doc project that I have been
> attempting to raise research funding for (unsuccessfully so far).
>
> I always thought the CoAO would be the trickiest part to put together,
> and was actually planning to work in this during years 3-5 in a 5yr
> project. After getting rejected for funding last October (working w.
> UoMcr proposing to AHRC) I started exploring and getting involved with
> the 'Aragon Project' community (cool people with some astonishing [&
> really-existing] crypto tech-tools).
>
> A small Aragon group started seriously considering and engaging in what
> a Cooperative DAO could be in practice. To this end I put togehter a
> small funding proposal that was voted though by $ANT holders (the Aragon
> token) a couple of days ago (whoop whoop!). So there'll be two of us
> working a couple of days a week each, with additional funds for CoopDAO
> members to also propose paid work a day p.w. to formulate and put into
> practice what this org can actually be.
>
> Quite excited:)
>
> https://twitter.com/AragonProject/status/1122172288462356484
>
>
> https://forum.aragon.org/t/agp-40-discussion-aragon-cooperative-dao-funding-proposal/783/12
>
> Totally agree Coops are definitely 'a thing' atm. For me, this is a very
> good thing. Also fascinating that (Ethereum mainly?) crypto is very much
> engaging in this too.
>
> I don't know where this is all going, perhaps this is what I like most.
>
> J.
>
> On 28/04/2019 15:21, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
> > Thanks Rob,
> > Full of great nuggets as always
> >
> > Past, Present, Future: From Co-ops to Cryptonetworks -
> >
> > https://a16z.com/2019/03/02/cooperatives-cryptonetworks/
> >
> >
> > Coops seem to be on the upsurge.
> > I'd be interested to know whether people here are already members of
> > coops as workers or customers and if so why?
> >
> >
> > ___
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
> > 
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised
> > Arts Lab
> > +44 (0) 77370 02879
> >
> > *Furtherfield *disrupts and democratises art and technology through
> > exhibitions, labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free
> > thinking.
> > furtherfield.org 
> >
> > *DECAL* Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0
> > technologiesresearch hub
> >
> > for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies now.
> >
> > decal.is 
> >
> >
> > Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee
> > registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
> > Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade,
> > Tally Ho Corner, London N12 0EH.
> >
>
> _

Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Rob Myers]

On 2019-04-28 7:21 a.m., Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
> Thanks Rob,
> Full of great nuggets as always
>
> Past, Present, Future: From Co-ops to Cryptonetworks -
> 
> https://a16z.com/2019/03/02/cooperatives-cryptonetworks/
> 
> Coops seem to be on the upsurge.

Yes. I assume it's because of this ;-) -

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/feb/15/tories-cooperatives-osborne

> I'd be interested to know whether people here are already members of
> coops as workers or customers and if so why?

I'm a member of a housing co-op because it's the only way to afford to
live where I do.

The people are mostly lovely, as are their dogs. I was very wary of
joining a co-op but after a couple of years it seems that The System
Mostly Works and there have been no suddenly disastrous measures adopted
at meetings (although the minor missteps always have the potential to
add up faster than I think people realize). It doesn't seem like a
template for a scalable or efficient form of socialism though.

- Rob.
___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Julian Brooks]

Hey Ruth,

Yeah I also found that article of interest too.
Insight from VC's, who'd a thunk it.

I've been digging into Coops for the last couple of years. For me stems 
from a visceral reaction to DAO's & 'Code as Law'. I just immediately 
thought it'd be better to consider them more human-centric - with DAO's 
being such a potential for collectivising power.

So started putting this kinda mental construct together 'Cooperative 
Autonomous Organisations', a sort of 'DAO, Coop, Mutual, Union' - type 
structure. This was to house the participants in the music licensing / 
smart contracts / IP-reinvention post-doc project that I have been 
attempting to raise research funding for (unsuccessfully so far).

I always thought the CoAO would be the trickiest part to put together, 
and was actually planning to work in this during years 3-5 in a 5yr 
project. After getting rejected for funding last October (working w. 
UoMcr proposing to AHRC) I started exploring and getting involved with 
the 'Aragon Project' community (cool people with some astonishing [& 
really-existing] crypto tech-tools).

A small Aragon group started seriously considering and engaging in what 
a Cooperative DAO could be in practice. To this end I put togehter a 
small funding proposal that was voted though by $ANT holders (the Aragon 
token) a couple of days ago (whoop whoop!). So there'll be two of us 
working a couple of days a week each, with additional funds for CoopDAO 
members to also propose paid work a day p.w. to formulate and put into 
practice what this org can actually be.

Quite excited:)

https://twitter.com/AragonProject/status/1122172288462356484

https://forum.aragon.org/t/agp-40-discussion-aragon-cooperative-dao-funding-proposal/783/12

Totally agree Coops are definitely 'a thing' atm. For me, this is a very 
good thing. Also fascinating that (Ethereum mainly?) crypto is very much 
engaging in this too.

I don't know where this is all going, perhaps this is what I like most.

J.

On 28/04/2019 15:21, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
> Thanks Rob,
> Full of great nuggets as always
> 
> Past, Present, Future: From Co-ops to Cryptonetworks -
> 
> https://a16z.com/2019/03/02/cooperatives-cryptonetworks/
> 
> 
> Coops seem to be on the upsurge.
> I'd be interested to know whether people here are already members of 
> coops as workers or customers and if so why?
> 
> 
> ___
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
> 
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised 
> Arts Lab
> +44 (0) 77370 02879
> 
> *Furtherfield *disrupts and democratises art and technology through 
> exhibitions, labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free 
> thinking.
> furtherfield.org 
> 
> *DECAL* Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0 
> technologiesresearch hub
> 
> for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies now.
> 
> decal.is 
> 
> 
> Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee
> registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
> Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade, 
> Tally Ho Corner, London N12 0EH.
> 

___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Re: [NetBehaviour] Links - Anyone members of coops?

[Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour]

Thanks Rob,
Full of great nuggets as always


> Past, Present, Future: From Co-ops to Cryptonetworks -
>
> https://a16z.com/2019/03/02/cooperatives-cryptonetworks/
>
>
Coops seem to be on the upsurge.
I'd be interested to know whether people here are already members of coops
as workers or customers and if so why?


___
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>


-- 
Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised Arts
Lab
+44 (0) 77370 02879

*Furtherfield *disrupts and democratises art and technology through
exhibitions,
labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free thinking.
furtherfield.org 

*DECAL* Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0 technologies
research hub

for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies now.

decal.is 

Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee
registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade,
Tally Ho Corner, London N12 0EH.
___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour