Archive:2005-06-15

IRC chat on 10:30 p.m. EST, 15 June 2005, #freeculture on FreeNodeIRC. Read the chatlog.

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.