Archive:Initial Report of Boston SCS

Initial Report on Boston Shared Culture Space
Tim Hwang, 7/14/07

 Structuring the Space (Organizationally)

In trying to figure out the best way of managing the space, there are three questions that seem most important:

[1] Whoâ€™s going to maintain the space?

[2] How do we bring people to the space?

[3] How do we build programming into the space so that itâ€™s easy to manage?

Problem (2) seems the most immediately pressing. To a greater or lesser extent, many groups involved in the â€œshared cultureâ€ arena already have a meeting place of some kind, and a worry with this kind of project is that we wonâ€™t be able to overcome the social inertia against participating in a new space.

The model that SJ, Oliver, and I were considering was to develop the space around a residency program. A small group (we were roughly considering around 4) would be selected on the basis of a free content-related project they would want to head up, favoring projects that would actively involve more the community. It would probably associated with some kind of stipend to deal with food/material costs, and the space would be a place for them to stay free of charge for a semester or two â€“ probably depending on the nature/quality of their proposal.

Responsibilities would include basic maintenance of the space, offering some kind of programming available to the public (which may or may not be tied to their project), making the place available as a working area for groups to settle into, providing space for community events, and holding regular meetings for people associated with the space to share their projects. (More on this below, see â€œNext Stepsâ€)

In addition to dealing with the original problem of trying to find a person to take care of the space full-time (Problem [1]), it also deals with our problem [2]. By having cool projects headquartered out of the space headed up by those actually living there, we build a reason for people to come out and get involved.

To a certain extent, it also handles our problem [3]. By adjusting who gets selected as a resident and having them provide the programming, it makes it easy for us to set a direction for the space and emphasize certain activities without actually having to deal with the logistics ourselves.

This has some advantages over the two models that Iâ€™ve heard advanced in the past few months. The first, which was briefly addressed at iCommons, was to just build a network of existing spaces with excess bandwidth that other friends of shared culture could come and use. While this might be an important resource to build (and might make a useful residency project at some point), I think it fails in the aim of actively encouraging the constant cross-fertilization that a single space would provide.

The second, which was described to me by Ben Sisto as an original draft plan for the space, was for the space to be built as simply a resource center, run by a few people full-time. (see below â€œResourcesâ€). In addition to the problem of finding people to commit to taking maintenance as a long-term position, runs into the problem that the space could become more of a public service than a cohesive community. (See examples like the Democracy Center) With the residents staying there, itâ€™s likely that theyâ€™ll bring their friends in to hang out in way that seems conducive to laying the groundwork for a successful space. Of course, again, this isnâ€™t to say that what weâ€™re proposing wouldnâ€™t work as a resource center, but that it might not be the best way of â€œframingâ€ the place.

Structuring the Space (Physically)

What weâ€™re probably looking at, then, is a loft set-up in the Boston area, hopefully in reasonable proximity to the groups weâ€™re already extensively involved with. In addition to living space for the residents, weâ€™d want some kind of lounge common space, probably adjoining a large(ish) open working area for groups/projects to set up in. (Plus all the standards â€“ kitchen, bathroom, easily convertible party space, etc)

Christina brought up a little while back that it would be really nice to have collaboration built into the architecture of the working area. Examples would include whiteboard walls, large tables shared by several projects, and an easily visible calendar of all events.

Ideally, weâ€™d want to collaborate with a landlord who already owns space and would be excited about hosting this in the long-term. Needless to say, a donation of space or favorable rental terms would be great to free up cash available to spend on financing projects/assisting residents.

In addition, a free content/shared culture media library would be great. Stark brought up the point that itâ€™s easy to obtain books free for projects like this just by asking â€“ which makes the only outstanding cost of developing this time. Amassing an archive of not only whatâ€™s being produced internally at the space but in the world more generally would be great. I think it might even be worth building a special curatorial residency around building the libraryâ€™s collection in certain directions.

Resources

At the time of writing, there are a number of potential resources that Iâ€™m aware of that would be awesome to follow up on.

Apparently there was a conversation between Wilbanks, Stark, and Sisto a few months back about potentially putting together financing to build this kind of space for the purpose of producing free content. Apparently Wilbanks was very willing to provide support and give really Stark/Sisto an open hand. From what I hear when I met up with him, Sisto wasnâ€™t able to follow up because of a new opportunity at Milky Way. Stark is following up.

Sisto also mentioned a free content grant idea (POOL) that he had a little while back. My notes donâ€™t say, but I think I recall him mentioning that there was a few people interested in putting it together. Probably worth talking to him about it.

SJ mentioned at our meeting that OLPC was putting together a series of grants in the near future to do a â€œsummer of contentâ€ program. He suggested that we might be able to nab an intern to help out on the logistics of this while weâ€™re all out of town.

Also probably worth doing is to check up with existing organizations to see if they have any advice to offer or knowledge of resources that weâ€™re unaware of. Potentially, this might be a job for the intern. These groups, for varying reasons, include: Cambridge/Boston City Councils, Democracy Center, YMCA, Dado Tea.

Oliver also noted that Linden might be interested. Heâ€™s talking to John to see if thereâ€™s the possibility for financing/collaboration.

Paul Graham as well, might be a good resources to get in touch with on this.

Rick Webb, COO of Barbarian Group, has been contacted by Stark and is circing her blurb (see below) to potential donors, etc.

John Sullivan, has also been STARKâ€™D.

Next Steps

1) Itâ€™s probably worth following up on all the resources listed above.

2) In the meanwhile, Oliver, SJ, and myself were talking about how itâ€™d be good to start doing open general meetings every week/two weeks for shared culture groups in the Boston area. Ideally, itâ€™d be arranged along a â€œworld tourâ€ format, where the location would be in a different space at each meeting. In addition to coordinating regularly on the next steps, the meetings would a good place to a) get more people interested and involved on building a space, and b) as a forum to share the projects everyone is working on. (Notably, this is an idea also mentioned independently by Sisto). Before we arrive back in Cambridge again â€“ this could also be an intern responsibility.

An initial listing of possible locations:

Berkman, One Broadway, Democracy Center, MIT Museum, Piano Factoryâ€¦

3) Putting together a website or a wiki to coordinate further on this.

Misc: Naming Issues

Josh Gay brought up the point that the term â€œFree Culture Spaceâ€ might be too restrictive for the scope of communities we want to get involved here â€“ particularly groups that already see themselves as different from â€œthe movementâ€ per se. Thereâ€™s also a pretty strong case that the term â€œFree Cultureâ€ might be rhetorically problematic. (See, e.g., rant on file with SJ). The working term Iâ€™ve been using here is â€œshared culture spaceâ€ â€“ but the issue might be worth considering. (Collaborative? Open?) Maybe even a neutral name would be best. (Like, the so-and-so Center).

Misc: E-mailable Blurb (courtesy Stark)

The Free Culture Space will be a cultural center that will bring together groups working on technology, music, art, education, and beyond. It will be open and accessible to the Boston and Cambridge community, and will forge connections with other spaces worldwide. The center will be an exhibition space for artwork and film, a meeting space for groups working on Free Culture-related issues, a free editing and recording space for video and music, and a workspace with free wifi. The FC Space will serve as a general gathering point for people around the Boston area interested in promoting a culture that is accessible to the world.

We are working together with several non-profits, including iCommons and Creative Commons, and are looking for a space in Cambridge that would be able to house such a center. We would be able to arrange non-profit and tax-deductable status. An ideal location would be Central Square, as we are looking to reach out to communities beyond the universities.