2005-06-15
From FreeCulture.org Wiki
IRC chat on 10:30 p.m. EST, 15 June 2005, #freeculture on FreeNodeIRC. Read the chatlog.
Contents |
Agenda
- Nelson will present his SWOT analysis
- Discussion of organizational models
Minutes
Attendance: Abhay, Asheesh, Gavin, Nelson, Stephen, Ben, Ben, Matt, Rebekah
SWOT analysis
- weakness: diversity of interests (more non-computer geeks)
- strive for diversity because: people are diverse, our message is more plausible that way,
- What can FC.o do to change the chapter-level demos?
- reaching out to artists
- many view fc.o with distrust
- everyone is a creator, but some are more creator than others (thanks gavin :)
- reaching self-sustaining mass may be more important
Org structure, wrt liability
- Are campus groups part of FC.o, or independent entities?
- Nelson: wrt 501(c)3 docs, the more FC.o funds and controls chapters, the more responsible FC.o is for them
- fund, but not control?
- chapters will not need permission to do some activity regardless
- control: either accept a chapter into FC.o, or deny it. Breaking the rules means we no longer associate with a chapter.
- usage of FC.o funds
- grants for special chapter projects
- FC.o is only a source for gear, not cash
- local funding would make it disappear fast; $2500 would cover maybe one event with big-name speaker/large advertising expenses
- money flowing from the top can make local groups look like astroturf, turning a strength into a weakness
- we need our law geeks to sort out the definition of liability for us
- perhaps they shouldn't be called "chapters"?
- Sign legal forms before accepting funds?
Org structure
- Are campus groups part of FC.o, or independent entities?
- should be independent, though FC.o may provide startup capital
- chapters are for promoting FC.o to us
- FC.o is for providing resources (Activist Packet) and helping groups collaborate, share experience and practical info
- FC.o is made of people from chapters
- defining FC.o around the chapters
- campus presence makes FC.o worthwhile
- choosing chapter members for national roles
- have a conference and election
- every chapter has a representative
- "indy charity" model: FC.o could be an independent charity, providing information and/or other resources to campus groups, not requiring representation
- only involvement with local groups is to choose whom to give access to resources
- works quietly, doesn't need PR
- some resources should be totally open, some should be granted at will of the FC.o leaders
- Who are the members?
- FC.o is for any students; if you are not attending a school, I'm afraid this organization is not for you
- youth and local community
- campus community
- faculty can be involved, but not control an org
(note to IRC: don't netsplit the minute-taker from everyone else :) Stephen Compall 00:02, 16 Jun 2005 (EDT)
FreeCulture.org is not the Free Culture movement
- can be composed differently than "all people interested in FC"
- FC.o is a student movement
- The mission:
- support building campus groups
- help represent their interests
- advocate participatory culture
- react to bad law, provide legal info (FC.o is not a lawyer)
- connect students with each other and other groups/businesses
- help them fight laws that erect barriers to participation
- Asheesh's mission statement: FreeCulture.org exists to empower students to organize local chapters and take the discussion to their campuses, bringing the result of a better-informed populace and more actively-involved consumers.