[hackerspaces] What form of organization does your hackerspace use?

Thu Oct 22 13:03:39 CEST 2009

Hey Nick,

After a quick read some nit-picking issues:

isn't this part two in the *six* part series?? That is, your
first post is considered a part as well, isn't it?

More importantly, perhaps you can change the link to revspace
from https://foswiki.sonologic.nl/RevelationSpace to http://revspace.nl/. We'll
likely be moving the site to a dedicated server soonish, making the old link
obsolete-ish..

Gr,

Koen

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:19:15PM -0400, Nick Farr (hackerspaces.org) wrote:
> Thanks everyone for your insight!  I just posted the article:
> 
> http://blog.hackerspaces.org/2009/10/20/hackerspaces-money-the-board/
> 
> I think this thread also brought up other issues which are important
> to address and emphasize, especially Koen's point:
> 
> "Anyway, all this discussion about boards and organisation forms etc
> might lead you to think that it is all about that. In fact, it is not.
> Once set up and organised, the board is basically only responsible for
> collecting membership dues and collecting the rent. And that's it. The
> rest is the fun part: projects, social events, etc..!"
> 
> Perhaps in a brief aside from this series, an article on the nature of
> membership in hackerspaces?
> 
> Nick Farr / http://nickfarr.org
> Washington, DC, 20013-1208 | +1 (707) 676-FARR | Fax: +1 (866)
> 536-2616 | 8B13F204
> Sent from Washington, DC, United States
> 
> 
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:44, nicolle <superherogirl at gmail.com> wrote:
> > you make a very good point about the creative direction of the hackerspace
> > versus the management and legal direction.
> >
> > i'm not on the board of directors of my hackerspace, but as my space's legal
> > advisor i work closely with them.  the way our bylaws are drafted, there is
> > very little authority actually given to the board of directors for much of
> > anything: creative or managerial.  however, that may be reassessed or
> > tweaked, since it seems rather impractical.  we still want the members to
> > have as much say as possible in what goes on.  but, practically speaking, it
> > ends up being the board of directors dealing a lot more with the managerial
> > stuff, and the membership dealing more with the creative direction.  yes, we
> > do have some members who are extremely interested in the managerial aspects
> > of the space, but they usually come and voice their opinions at the
> > directors meetings (which are weekly, before the membership meetings, and
> > open to everyone), since that's where the meat of the discussions on such
> > matters occurs.   the board of directors does very little, on the other
> > hand, about the creative direction of the space...what projects get done,
> > and how the infrastructure is built out to do that, never falls to a
> > directorial vote.  if there's a critical mass among the members to start an
> > area or a project, it just sort of happens.
> >
> > i can't say we've completely solved this tension or found the best middle
> > ground for it, though, and i really like this thread because it's letting me
> > know how other hackerspaces are dealing with similar growing pains.  we're
> > soon revising our bylaws, and i want to make sure that it doesn't take too
> > much power out of the hands of the membership, but still reflects the
> > board's heightened involvement in the managerial and legal issues--both
> > because they are legally obligated to make sure it's well-run, and because
> > it would be a bureaucratic nightmare to force all of the members, many of
> > whom aren't all that interested in the day-to-day boredom of keeping a
> > nonprofit running, to vote on every little day-to-day issue.
> >
> > nicolle
> >
> >
> >
> > Seth Hardy wrote:
> >>
> >> one thing to consider that, as someone who was on the board of a
> >> hackerspace, i found frustrating:
> >>
> >> it's all well and good to say "the board has no special powers, we should
> >> be a one tier membership system." however, in certain cases (such as when
> >> the hackerspace has incorporated and taken on legal responsibilities under
> >> the corporation name), the board has additional legal and financial
> >> responsibilities over the rest of the members. these responsibilities
> >> include ways they are legally obligated to act, as well as the liabilities
> >> if something goes wrong.
> >>
> >> the creative direction of the space should be advanced by the members, but
> >> (for example) if someone's name is on the lease, they probably should have
> >> additional authority or "special powers" (but only as much as is necessary!)
> >> to enforce their additional responsibility and minimize their additional
> >> liability.
> >>
> >> if you want to avoid thinking of it as "special status," keep the
> >> management and legal obligations separate from creative direction. the
> >> latter can still be run by the members and coexist with the possibility of
> >> "this smaller group of people can kick you out if you light shit on fire
> >> inside." if people act reasonably, the board will never have to act with
> >> this kind of authority.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 06:17:56PM +0200, Koen Martens wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 05:48:48PM +0200, quemener.yves at free.fr wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think where we'll end up is a board model with heavy membership
> >>>>> consultation.  So about halfway between board and membership, I
> >>>>> guess. That's just my feeling, though.  Hard to tell.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I have been pondering this a bit, if the hackerspace in Grenoble ever
> >>>> kicks off, what about the structure ? I think most problems comes from the
> >>>> perceived hierarchy between board members, regular paying members and
> >>>> occasional members. I wonder if a system would work where you would consider
> >>>> the "board" (namely the management of the space, the legalities, the
> >>>> inventory, etc...) as a project like all the others, where people are
> >>>> welcome to contribute or not.
> >>>> I tend to value more the group of people and the set of projects and
> >>>> consider them independent of the physical space itself. If a space fails for
> >>>> any reason, the projects can survive through transplantation somewhere else.
> >>>> Maybe this opinion comes from the fact that we don't have a permanent
> >>>> space yet here and that we are all somehow trapped inside a medium-sized
> >>>> city. But I wonder... There is this kind of hierarchical feeling that the
> >>>> managers of the physical space are the bosses of the group, I wonder if it
> >>>> is unavoidable. Sure they can veto some projects happening in their
> >>>> facilities (no amateur pyrotechnics here !) but there is no reason to give
> >>>> them any power to anything not related to the physical space management.
> >>>>
> >>>> What do you think about this approach ?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I see the whole board-thing as a necesarry evil, but want to avoid giving
> >>> the board
> >>> members any special status whatsoever. It is exactly this hierarchical
> >>> thing that may
> >>> lead to what I described earlier, where the board will have more and more
> >>> work and
> >>> the membership becomes an apathic bunch. In my eyes, board members are
> >>> just participants
> >>> who get to do some of the more boring stuff.
> >>>
> >>> There's some questions about accountability that i'm sidestepping here
> >>> though, who is
> >>> responsible if you all decided you _will_ have a pyrotechnics workshop in
> >>> your space
> >>> and people get hurt?? You can have members sign a waiver, but what about
> >>> neighbours? If
> >>> it comes to that, they will probably look at the board and sue the board,
> >>> not the members..
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, all this discussion about boards and organisation forms etc might
> >>> lead you to
> >>> think that it is all about that. In fact, it is not. Once set up and
> >>> organised, the board
> >>> is basically only responsible for collecting membership dues and
> >>> collecting the rent. And
> >>> that's it. The rest is the fun part: projects, social events, etc..!
> >>>
> >>> Gr,
> >>>
> >>> Koen
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Discuss mailing list
> >>> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >>>
> >>
> >>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Discuss mailing list
> >> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 