An early vision
Posted by: Jon Olsen on: July 7, 2009
I propose that we create a new, neutral non-profit organization with the goal of serving as a coordinating space between any and all willing fan-run organizations in the region.
- A small, nimble nonprofit board organization
- A nonprofit which has the ability and the mandate to look for larger projects benefiting multiple organizations.
What we’re talking about here is a neutral ground, comprised of experienced leaders of fan-run organizations.
- Establish a basic requirement of tenure as exec, director, or other leader in a fan organization (could set additional organizational requirements too)
- Set a limit on number of board representatives from any one organization
- Experience and “sweat equity” would be critical components
- Maybe invite a non-affiliated at large member as an adjunct (the way many boards often have community leaders as participants)
Participating groups would affiliate with this organization by mutual choice
- Partner organizations would vote to affiliate through a contract arrangement.
- Unless otherwise agreed, relationships would be reporting relationships, rather than managerial
- Affiliation agreements would be dissolvable by either party but only with significant lead time—at least one year.
- Affiliating organizations would participate in revenue sharing.
Other structures may need to be analyzed and considered
- This organization would share out block grants to organizations with budgetary needs.
- This could provide nonprofit fiscal sponsorship to new regional organizations, reducing or alleviating startup requirements for nonprofit status.
Again take note of the words:
A nonprofit which has the ability and the mandate to look for larger projects benefiting multiple organizations.
I want to put together an organization that will
1) Have autonomy
2) Preserve participating groups’ autonomy
3) Build something bigger.
A lot bigger. Like a community center.
90 Responses to "An early vision"
July 9, 2009 at 5:37 pm
So what happens if MarsCon comes to the table? Do they get a bailout? I’d hate for shoddy mismanaged cons/organizations join up expecting a blank check to solve their financial troubles from the better run, financially successful cons like Detour and CONvergence.
July 9, 2009 at 5:51 pm
I’m not sure that’s a fair characterization. For one thing CONvergence just completed perhaps our most successful year to date, managerial and finance wise (final numbers still to come) but there is a small number of our attendees who consider it a “shoddy” convention that could be “run better.”
In fact Marscon is “invited to the table.”
That part of the conversation is still under consideration obviously. But remember in the case of this proposed vision, the participants are expected to retain autonomy. Does this extend to granting participating organizations money in exchange for certain considerations? I can’t say today.
However, I am not privy to their books. Are you? Do you have permission to publicize the state of their finances if you do have access?
July 9, 2009 at 6:05 pm
I can’t speak to MarsCon’s financials, but as Jon said they’re invited.
I think I’m hearing an expectation or assumption in your comment, MarkD, that maybe you can help clarify. Do you expect or assume that any joiner organizations would have a shared financial model with the larger group or among the participant groups?
Or was that just a fear or concern that one group might not contribute as much (financially, or otherwise) than the benefits they receive from the team?
(Again, not talking MarsCon here, just in general.)
July 9, 2009 at 6:53 pm
MarkD, I attempted to add an additional reply to the email address you listed, however the gmail mail delivery subsystem reports your listed email address does not exist. Please email leagueofwonders@gmail.com from a working address so that we can communicate. If you can’t do that…let’s say in three days…I will post that private reply here and will more assertively moderate your future comments.
July 12, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Email text follows:
Mark,
Hi there. I went ahead and approved and replied to your comment. I want to make sure you understand that serious questions and opinions, even negative ones, are welcome on our site.
I am concerned that you named names. To wit, you criticized Marscon on a subject which I cannot verify for accuracy. It’s in our interest as a community to have honest and open discussions, so I wasn’t about to suppress what you said out of hand. I do want to keep the tone civil, and the term “shoddy” is not entirely civil. This is not generally going to be an open forum for addressing problems internal to conventions or organizations.
Have you made your criticisms and concerns known to the leadership over at Marscon? Are you part of their leadership or their convention committee? Because this league idea on its face is not going to fix internal problems of partner organizations or potential partner organizations. Those are going to have to be dealt with internally, and if you’re in a position to take them to their internal organization, please don’t hesitate to do so. If there is a problem, they deserve to hear about it directly, not third hand on another website.
Keep coming back, keep raising questions, but please keep it civil and verifiable.
Best,
Jon Olsen
league of wonders site admin
July 9, 2009 at 5:49 pm
I’m obviously interested in invested in this, since I’m on the list on contributors.
I’ll be posting an intro and my notes from the Geek Community Center panel at CONvergence soon.
July 9, 2009 at 6:15 pm
I think this is a great idea, Jon, but I hope you and everyone else knows just how big this is. Minneapolis has a very large “fan” community, who are into more than just “geek” concepts such as science fiction, fantasy, anime, etc. Where will the line be drawn? Many of us are into theater as well. And what about musicians? Is this simply a community for organizations that run conventions?
I understand that you’re at the design stage right now, but please consider as much of the community as possible, not necessarily for involvement in the society, but for how it will affect them.
July 9, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Nope, not just for conventions. As was asked at our Community Center panel, where do we draw the line? Well, one thing we didn’t want to do was just start and end with convention organizing groups. These are the highest profile organizations, however, and represent the widest networks at this time. And this version of the idea was incubated in convention planning circles. But no, not just con groups. I think we’ll see one thing emerge however: geek is very very likely the identifying shibboleth for this. I would like to see this aimed at and led by geek oriented groups. The definition is very broad, I recognize, but if an organization cannot identify itself proudly as such, they’re going to have a slightly tougher time getting along with the other groups!
As for how big it is, lord I hope so! Look at the mailing lists for just two of the convention organizations we’re talking about and you’re talking 10,000 names (there’s a fairly surprisingly low amount of duplication across the CVG and AD attendees). We’re talking about tens of thousands of people. Five digits easily.
“Give me a lever long enough…”
July 9, 2009 at 6:42 pm
This does raise a good point.
I know of a few other organizations/events that would probably fit nicely into this fold, one of which might include “Goth Prom”. However, that organization (while staffed by volunteers and fans) has LOTS of affiliates and does get some swag and merchandise support from corporate sponsors. It’s also worth noting that there is quite a bit of crossover between CONvergence and Goth Prom attendees. So where do we draw the line? It’s certainly worth more discussion. :)
July 13, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Good grief, the variety out there is huge, and I’d think we would want it all.
Robot building, SCA, or geochaching all seem geeky to me. Programs and resources for/by them should be welcome.
Geeks make music, theatre and dance; as geeks are part of the community, so why not?
The key is not to make a list of who is allowed to participate, but build a list of who is interested in participating.
July 13, 2009 at 9:33 pm
who is interested in participating.
Yes. Exactly. Who do we want involved? Anyone that is interested and wants to be involved.
Yes, that could be A LOT of people. I hope so.
July 9, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Hi there. I’m on the MNstf board of directors and co-chaired the last two Minicons.
I just wanted to say that while I share some of the concerns that others have voiced here and am also not entirely clear on what the boundaries and goals of your proposed organization are, I am interested in seeing where you go.
If you’d like to discuss in person, perhaps you’d like to come to our next board meeting. It’s at my house, 1631 Selby Ave #1, Saint Paul, at noon on July 25th.
July 9, 2009 at 4:56 pm
I would argue that the very fact that you’re holding board meetings in a private home points up the value of a community center. It seems our alternatives for holding organizational meetings for fannish activities are either private homes, or coffeeshops and other public places. Individual fannish groups might be connected with a university or church or something for meeting function space, but there isn’t a good fandom-wide option.
July 9, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Probably there are people more comfortable going to a public place, especially for a first time. I, however, find that gatherings in people’s homes are MUCH more fun than those in public spaces.
July 10, 2009 at 9:46 am
I agree that the general meetings / gatherings work well (enough) in homes, but during my tenure I would have preferred to hold the board meetings in a public space.
July 10, 2009 at 10:03 am
I agree that it makes sense to hold board meetings in a public space. This is what I was used to from being on the board of another organization before MNStf. For that organization, we had all of our board meetings in coffee shops. The disadvantage to that approach, of course, is that everyone feels like they need to buy some food or drink from the shop. I suppose we could also have met in a library, but that comes with its own complications/disadvantages.
So far, I’ve been rolling with recent tradition, but I could make waves if I thought that we were likely to be realistically excluding people who would otherwise attend with our current approach. (I use the word “realistically” because I don’t actually think that very many people *want* to attend board meetings in the first place.)
July 10, 2009 at 11:42 am
Huh, board meetings seem like the BEST case for holding in people’s homes: small, just the board and very few others, so everybody has space and one person getting to stay home isn’t swamped by total number, and the people going to board meetings are much more likely to know the host before the meeting so there’s less likely to be discomfort from that.
July 10, 2009 at 11:51 am
dd-b: A reasonable argument. It all depends on how often you think new people will want to attend board meetings. If you expect people to frequently come to the board, for instance, to ask for funds for new fannish projects, it would be nice to have a lower social bar for them to attend. On the other hand, if all the board ever does is make sure that there’s money for regularly scheduled parties, there’s no such need. MNstf, I would say, leans towards the latter, but is not all the way there. And there’s a fair amount of positive feedback in the system.
July 9, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Seems like being clearer (or more specific) on the goals would be useful. Right now, there’s talk of money going out (“share out block grants”) but no details on incoming, and no details on purposes to be supported (beyond “needs”).
Then in the comments there seems to be mention of real estate (at least rented space).
Certainly NESFA and LaSFS at least are significantly defined by the space they own, and benefit from it (I think NESFA press would be really hard to run as a distributed enterprise).
July 9, 2009 at 7:45 pm
I wanted to make one real quick comment back: yes! one unconcealed goal here is real estate. Absolutely. That was what was in the CONvergence panel, that’s in the bottom of the post, that’s always present in my participation in these discussions.
July 9, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Drawback to a single venue: the biggest, most obvious, one is that it’s in THE SAME PLACE. So it’s always closer to some people and less close to other people, and it’s always the same. Also, unless the group is *never* going to cater to people with various environmental sensitivities, it has to ALWAYS do so.
Not that there aren’t advantages; quite a few are obvious, and some have been pointed out.
July 10, 2009 at 10:16 am
Interesting. I hadn’t thought of the ideas you bring up, David.
You mention a single location being in the same place as being inherently undesirable, outside of it being more (or less) convenient for some to get to. What is so bad about a same meeting location?
Distance from my home to potential meeting sites was never even a remote consideration for me when I threw my hat in to be on the board of Directors for CONvergence. I just took it as a given that I’d be expected to get to meetings as part of my responsibilities as a Director.
Likewise I never considered a consistent meeting location to be a drawback, only an advantage so I don’t need to figure out how to get to whichever venue-du-jour.
Thanks for the alternate perspective.
July 10, 2009 at 10:29 am
Probably it goes without saying at this point, but some people don’t get around town as easily as others. While some people can drive, can afford to drive, want to drive and, in fact, currently have a reliable car available, others either can’t afford it, are physically or legally unable, or feel it is environmentally irresponsible. This doesn’t mean they can’t get to meetings, but it does put a much higher premium on distance and proximity to bike paths, bus routes and rail lines.
Having meetings in many different locations doesn’t automatically improve the situation for these people, but it at least pretty much guarantees that they can get to at least *some* meetings easily.
And (perhaps also obvious) just because we get a club house doesn’t mean that we’re obliged to hold every meeting there (although there will perhaps be pressure to do so), so this is not meant as an attempt to shoot down the idea; just pointing some things out.
Well, yeah, the proximity to mass transit would need to play a big part in any such venue. The MISFITS Board meetings were in a private home, but because they were open to all (save when we had to discuss any sensitive information), they were a block and a half from a major bus line. The current MISFITS office, while not ideal in terms of handicap accessibility (the office and the meeting room are up and down one flight of stairs, respectively), was within a few blocks of several bus lines.
July 9, 2009 at 8:40 pm
I think this, in principle, is a grand idea. Many ethnic groups have established community halls in the early 20th century. That may be a sound model to look at. This should be simple, obviously groups have established similar places of community gathering. Don’t try to re-invent the wheel. Come up with a simple solid vision and goal. I realize this is the beginning of a project and is still fluid but be very clear and concrete of what you are trying to accomplish by this project. Just some thoughts.
July 9, 2009 at 4:53 pm
That’s a really good way to put it! I often refer to fandom as “my tribe”, and it feels a lot like an ethnic community.
July 9, 2009 at 4:22 pm
I would love to see some sort of Geek Clubhouse in the Twin Cities. I attended a panel at Capricon this past February that had someone from LASFS and someone from NEFSA talking about how they got theirs.
Given that, I have been part of two or three attempts to start a Pagan Community Center. One got as far as renting a building, and lasted about 4 years. I could tell you a few do’s and don’t's from that experience. A large part of the problems stemmed from having to have income on a reliable basis. Another problem is how to make decisions when you have a very diverse set of people.
July 9, 2009 at 10:44 pm
I think I know how NESFA and BSFA got theirs. Did LaSFS get theirs that way too? I don’t remember. I don’t think I’m willing to go THAT far!
July 10, 2009 at 10:17 am
Care to share the method they used, David?
July 14, 2009 at 11:52 am
In fact we will share some of the method that they used, as they sent us a video on the subject! We’ll post that soon.
July 28, 2009 at 11:08 am
You probably already have someplace in mind, but if you don’t, and you’re looking for a place to host files like that with unlimited storage and bandwith, I can set you up with a subdirectory or a subdomain for any of the following domains: sf-fan.net, sf-fan.org, sffan.net, sffan.org, stfnal.com, stfnal.net, or stfnal.org.
July 9, 2009 at 5:10 pm
It doesn’t have to be that hard, and it really does make sense. You have 4 main conventions in the area along with lots of smaller branches, and a lot of overlapping interest. IE. misfits has a game club, and i think MinSF does too, etc. A lot of people from these different groups could come together for activities, or hold seperate activities but all in the same space. It also creates a more comfortable atmosphere for newcomers who might be highly uncomfortable with going to peoples houses. I think it’s a great idea, and if you are worried about financials you can come up with something like a suggested donation for events ($2 to come to a movie or game night), etc. We could keep consessions on hand to raise money for the place too. Yes, it would have to be supstidized but it’s possible.
Also if we could get a place with an office attached, and if Misfits wanted to have ownership of the office then they could pay for that larger portion of the cost.
As for negative comments about leaving conventions out because of how they manage their money, sorry but you are totally missing the point of this. the point is to come together and enjoy the company and all that there is to offer from all the groups, not to point fingers and tell different groups how they aren’t good enough. I’m sure there are ways to manage the money that would leave most people satisfied.
Jon – are you thinking about having a brainstorming session with members of all the local groups invited?
July 10, 2009 at 8:31 am
To your direct question: yes. Lots of them. Some have started, there will be more, and larger ones.
July 10, 2009 at 8:57 am
I hope that the “Geek Community Center” panel, or something very similar, will make an appearance at all “local” conventions over the next year. And that there will be additional formal and informal meetings & conversations on the topic.
I’m already figuring out which conventions I’m attending or need to attend in the next 12 months to help carry on those conversations.
July 10, 2009 at 9:04 am
Jon and Charles have already spoken with me about bringing the panel to AD, and I think the conversation should continue there and in other venues.
Interestingly, I think that while the Community Center could be wonderful, the focus on real estate is almost secondary to my desires in the project. Personally, I’m thinking about all of the outreach programs we can bring to schools and youth groups, both of geeky and artistic natures. With the ongoing cuts to the arts in schools someone needs to step in and pick up the slack.
Who better than us?
July 12, 2009 at 9:03 am
While I wouldn’t want the conversation to dominate the entire weekend at OmegaCon (after all, that con is about getting away, relaxing, and not thinking too much) I think it might be beneficial to have a formal conversation about this at OmegaCon (I’m sure there will be many such informal conversations there) but it would be cool to carve out maybe an hour or two block of time on Sunday early afternoon upstairs in one of the meeting rooms if you guys wanted the space/time.
July 12, 2009 at 10:39 am
Has there ever been an actualfactual realiotrulio panel at Omegacon? Wouldn’t people rebel?! I don’t know. The price seems so high!
July 13, 2009 at 10:47 am
Does watching movies and cartoons count as a panel? What about Peep crafting? That’s sorta panel-esque, yes?
July 14, 2009 at 12:09 pm
No problem, just call it a roundtable.
I wonder though, if having it on Sunday at Omegacon, you would lose most of the “casual” attendees, and just have the organizational geeks stick around (IE, the same crowd on this blog, or at the panel at CVG). I’m not sure if that’s a bad thing, but it does seem counter to the point of getting another community involved in the discussion.
July 9, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Thanks for organizing this venue for conversation. I have been active in local fandom for over twenty years, and currently serve on the Gaylaxicon committee. I have been on committees for Minicon and Diversicon and participated in parties and panels at CONvergence.
In regards to a community center, we have some very active groups in MSP someone/group would need to maintain/publish a schedule of activies, but I don’t think it would be too difficult, especially when considering the long list of ongoing or recurring events already being organized. I particularly like the thought that more open interclub activities such as gaming or dances could be organized. In days of yore the individual Trek clubs gathered for a joint holiday party and it was a better event for it.
I was involved in the startup of Diversicon, and I recall that we received a grant from MnStf, the folks behind Minicon. There was no stigma attached, but it was only once to show support.
July 9, 2009 at 6:01 pm
I am very much on board with this idea. I have concerns, but they all run toward the political and organizational. Conceptual, I have no concerns at all: I think it’s a great idea, and that it can be made to work, and I would like to have a hand in helping to make it a reality.
One thing I would like to see, organizationally, is that this new foundation have *no* “ex officio” representation from the existing convention organizations, no “partner organizations”. Just people.
Why? Because groupthink is hard enough to deal with when you’re just dealing with the internal politics of a single organization. The politics if this becomes, basically, a federal body would be extremely painful if not impossible.
July 9, 2009 at 7:26 pm
I’m not sure I follow your last two points. Can you expand?
July 9, 2009 at 10:44 pm
I can try. I believe I spoke about this at the panel a bit, as well, and I know someone else brought up an historical analogy similar to what I’m going to use.
When the American Revolution was being kindled, the colonies gathered together for a Continental Congress. Congress, then, did not mean “legislature” at all. It meant diplomatic conference.
The individuals attending the Congress were not there as individuals, and in theory had no independence–they voted the conscience of the legislatures that sent them, not their own. They were there as ambassadors from their colonies. Those colonies each had very different philosophies, economies, and relationships with the mother country, and hence, had very different interests.
The result was…not pretty. In the end, the Revolutionary War was a success for the future United States not because of Congress but in spite of it.
So, there are two ways I can see THIS organization being constituted:
* Headed by a board, self-selected or elected, of individuals who are likely to represent different corners of Twin Cities fandom, but are not part of the board to specifically represent the interests of any other organizations they might belong to.
* Headed by a board made up of delegates from various existing organizations who “buy in” to the concept.
In the head article of this thread, you suggest that it would be more like the former…but you go on to talk about partner organizations. IMO, even having the *concept* of partner organizations immediately opens the organization up to the same sort of politics. Each “partner” will, I’m afraid, pull in their own direction, and look out primarily for their own interests.
I will admit this is a cynical view. I’m prepared to be convinced that I’m being too pessimistic. But I have no desire to see this idea, or the community center I hope results from it, wrecked by squabbles between, for example, rival convention committees.
July 9, 2009 at 10:47 pm
On the other hand, if it *isn’t* a League of Nations type organization, is it anything more than a new attempt at a broad-spectrum club, inherently competing with the existing clubs?
July 9, 2009 at 11:39 pm
I think finding the right sort of model for this new organization is very important, and one reason for this discussion is that we aren’t there yet. I don’t think we are leading to a new “club” — we have plenty of those in our community, both formal and informal.
We’ve also had groups in the Twin Cities that presented themselves as “Fan Alliances” and the like. And those didn’t really work either.
I’m not a huge expert on their organization — but one that I think might be a worthwhile comparison is the United Way, or similar types of organizations.
July 10, 2009 at 8:38 am
DDB: I don’t deny the possibility in theory; but in practice…what is it competing for? I don’t see any of the ideas being proposed for either this organization or the hoped-for community center as competing with anything currently being done…
There are only so many warm bodies for events (or we have only so many hours in our schedule for events), only so many volunteer hours, and so forth. A new group with the ongoing activity level to afford real estate would absorb rather a lot of them. I chose to describe that as “competition” for them.
July 10, 2009 at 9:53 am
Well choose your descriptions wisely sir!
If the point is to provide places for all these other groups to do all their activities in, then it’s not really a competition. If the affiliation is at the organizational level, then the activities are solely driven by the affiliated organizations and their range of things to do.
The “events” you reference would be the events of those organizations that have those limited bodies and hours. They would be able to happen here. That was the point.
July 9, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Intriguing idea. More or less how the food co-op movement began. Real estate infers ownership and incorporation. I’m a philosopher and a social historian, not an organizer, and as such, I wish you much luck in this. I’ll drop by here from time to time to see how it’s going. Certainly seems like a good time to buy a small property, like, say, maybe, an old VFW hall, eh? That idea was floating around Minstf probably 20 years ago but never got much traction.
July 9, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Well, we’re here hoping something gets more traction.
I wouldn’t be opposed to an old VFW, by the way. But I’d like to imagine a little bigger.
Bigger physically? Because I have the feeling you’re dreaming beyond what any SF club has managed so far.
The previous successful examples I know of have all been long-established clubs deciding to have their own space; trying to do it in a new startup organization is already extremely aggressive.
July 10, 2009 at 9:59 am
I prefer assertive. But if aggressive works, I’ll take it.
Yes, David, I would love to be guilty of dreaming beyond what any SF club has managed so far.
July 10, 2009 at 12:07 am
There have certainly been informal talks between some of the detour and CONvergence folks about attempting some club activities. Lack of space is usually brought up in the same conversations. So I think there are some needs right off the bat.
Can you expand a bit on what you would envision Revenue Sharing entailing?
July 10, 2009 at 8:33 am
Yes: put your extra money here.
July 10, 2009 at 10:25 am
The devil is in the details for what exactly “extra” is. Misfits, Mnstf, and I assume even AD have ongoing community activities. The community center sounds like a project that would compliment those goals.
Is the expectation that the member organizations move all unallocated funds to this new non-prof each year? Or is it more that each organization pays some sort of contractual share to cover the expenses? Perhaps each organization funds a grant to the new non-prof, those grants would seed the eventual goal?
From my standpoint I see that now is the perfect time to buy commercial Real Estate. At the same time, I think this idea is a good couple years away from having the funding to actually execute the plan.
Be that as it may, the community has a need. I think it easiest to start with an organization set up like a joint venture. The member organizations determine how much space they need each year. That is used to get bids from spaces as a large combined pool. Hopefully getting much better rates than any one group could get on it’s own.
July 10, 2009 at 9:49 am
I don’t see any reason whatosever why Anime Detour should be subsidizing other people and am extremely against it. AD’s money should be spent to help AD, and not to subsidize other people’s projects which may or may not be useful.
I have no objection to various people getting together and doing things, but I am strongly against any kind of money transfer.
Inevitably, the most successful conventions would end up paying in the most, and getting the least out of this. This is useful for conventions which are not so great at making money, but useless for conventions which are. Also, won’t this open a big can of worms if conventions that are for-profit and conventions that are not are involved?
I’m not accusing anyone of nefarious plans here, but I do think this hasn’t been properly thought through.
July 10, 2009 at 9:57 am
Last statement first: if this was the end stage, you would be 100% correct. It has not been properly thought through. Fortunately this is the beginning and we’re just starting the thinking through. That’s why it’s called “a vision” and uses the adjective “early.”
As for what AD does with their money, that’s up to AD. But last I understood, when you are profitable, you take those profits and put them somewhere. I’ll let Kale and the rest of the AD board answer those questions, ultimately. But perhaps there’s a somewhere that could service you more directly.
July 10, 2009 at 9:58 am
Actually, James, we already DO fund other people’s projects. Once a year the Board takes a chunk of our profits and assigns them to various charities and organizations, such as the Minneapolis Public Libraries, The Japanese-American Student Council (JASC), the Gordon R. Dickson Memorial Scholarship, and more. This isn’t to say that this is or is not one of those places money should be going – we need a more solid idea of where this is going first. But getting involved in the conversation early is a good way to at least stay abreast of the various developments and to evaluate if/when this becomes something worth supporting.
July 10, 2009 at 10:37 am
Kale, if junior staff at Detour isn’t aware that the parent company is and has been dishing out money to community non-profits in accordance with our 501(c)(3) mission, we’ve been doing it wrong. ;)
I don’t think James’ objection is to that so much as it is to handing ATC’s extra money to LoW to help buy a Geek Community Center and fund projects that aren’t pertinent to what ATC was founded for. Besides, given the nature of our thing, there really shouldn’t be any surplus funds: you’re either funding next year’s AD, or you’re passing out money to deserving cultural organizations with Japanese flava, amirite?
July 10, 2009 at 10:47 am
There’s a side discussion with particular attention to anime & Klingon fandom over on my LJ. I didn’t post it to the main LoW site for a couple of reasons, one being that I’m not really an active member of Twin Cities fandom any more, and the other being that I didn’t think it was right to drop five paragraphs of occasionally cynical criticism into a comment.
July 10, 2009 at 10:52 am
Sorry for replying to my own post, but I’m not getting a ‘Reply’ off of Kevin’s.
But as you well know, not all of the projects we fund have anything to do with the Japanese, ‘flava’ or otherwise. While we do have a bent in that direction, the Red Cross, the Gordon R. Dickson scholarship, both of which we funded while you were on the Board, have no particular Japanese bent at all.
The point is that ATC, as a board, have not only contributed to Japanese projects, but to things that help community and fandom as a whole, either locally or globally, which is hopefully what the end goal here is. I’m not saying give them access to the Chairman’s budget… after all, there is no Chairman’s budget ;)… but I am saying getting involved in the discussion is probably better than dismissing it out of hand.
We’re not at the point where the money’s flowing – heck, we’ve made our decisions for this year and won’t be even considering funding this until next year – which means we have the better part of a year to discuss and evaluate. And then when the time comes, we can make an informed decision.
July 10, 2009 at 11:20 am
Yeah, I know we fund stuff in the community. I just don’t like the thought of funding -other convention’s- projects and all. That’s what I’m objecting to.
I have no real objections to AD funding stuff like those anime things at libraries and so forth, because it’s kept in-house. The problem I have is giving our money to someone else to do things with where we don’t have any direct control over it.
Kevin basically hit it on the nose with his comment about funding things that arn’t pertinent to what AD was made for, and also about AD’s surplus cash.
July 10, 2009 at 11:51 am
But really, the library thing is the only place we donate money where we do have control over it. Very few (read: none) of the charities we donate to do we have any specific controls over how the money is applied.
Remember, this is still in the planning stages. Nothing is decided on what this project will (if anything) eventually be. Is it better to say that since it potentially could be something we don’t want to fund we should walk away, or should we pariticpate in the discussion and see if it can’t become something we would want to fund?
July 10, 2009 at 9:51 am
While I like the idea of getting the real estate, I think the first thing that needs to happen is the organization needs to prove their ideas first. It’s all well and good to say give us your money and we’ll give you space, but what programs can the LoW do that the individual orgs and cons cannot?
Don’t take this as detriment; it’s most certainly not. What I’m challenging is I think how the majority of fandom views how this works – the idea that fans themselves, as small clubs of some variety or other, are micro scale and cons are macro scale. What If conventions are the middle stage? What does macro look like then? What benefits and things can we do at that scale?
Personally, what I’d like to see is a greater emphasis on outreach programs; touring schools and potentially running afterschool programs at the GCC when real estate eventually becomes a reality. While I like the idea that part of the charter is a summit of conventions, I really think that it should be almost backseat to the next level of community building, whatever we collectively decide that is.
Thoughts?
July 10, 2009 at 12:29 pm
I’m not currently on the Minn-StF board or in a Minicon management position, and hence am very definitely not speaking for anybody but myself.
I’m going to go through the regular events associated with Minn-StF and discuss their possible relationship to a geek community center as I see it.
Minn-StF does the following regular things:
Twice a month “meetings”, meaning a social event, a party. They generally start at 2pm, with nobody showing up until 4pm, and run until 10pm or much later if people are in the mood. The vast majority of these are hosted by people in their homes. Minn-StF reimburses a small amount for supplies, but based on my last couple of times hosting, I’d estimate that most hosts are kicking in at least that much additional themselves. Disadvantages of hosting in people’s homes: some people would prefer not to go to people’s homes, especially when first making contact with a group. Not everybody has the space to host, so the number of possible hosts is limited. Not everybody is willing to host an open event, so the number of possible hosts is limited. Since the location moves around, you have to figure out how to get to a bunch of different locations. Host expose their stuff to the risks of how people will treat it. Advantages: It’s easier for the host, they can use their own kitchen and don’t have to haul stuff around (people often make big pots of chili or something for dinner, in addition to usual party munchies). There will be one close to you now and then for a much wider range of people. The space is much nicer, and less noisy, than something like a park community room, VFW hall, or the like. There are more places to break down into small groups for conversation, games, or whatever. You get to see people’s homes. It’s cheap, no direct space rental or indirect costs for the space. Comments: We’ve held a couple of these in library rooms, for outreach, and the tone and activities were very different, and for my tastes considerably less interesting.
Board of directors meetings. These are technically open, except they sometimes have to clear the room for certain discussions. It’s rare for more than a couple of people besides the board to show up. Since it’s often just 5 people, the fact that one of them doesn’t have to travel shows up as an advantage (for a bigger event it’s swamped by the numbers). Also, the one hosting may have big or heavy piles of stuff the board has to deal with. The people attending board meetings are nearly always long-time associates of the club, so they’re likely to already know the host and know the location. Since they’re small, pretty much anybody can host one. I don’t see any advantages for using rented space for these.
Minicon concom meetings: these are back to being relatively small, but my experience includes hosting big ones in my house, and attending big ones in hotel space, park buildings, and elsewhere. It’s important for the space not to be too cramped, which can be a reason for holding them in rented space. Enough tables and chairs are often hard to provide (though sitting on a couch with a clipboard works for many people too). We did host them at the hotel when they were offering that, and then we used rented space after Minicon 34 when we were working especially hard to be visibly open, and getting more people to meetings than usual. That may also color my opinion somewhat against rented space :-). But generally, these kind of real working meetings benefit most from the sorts of things, sheer size, and tables, and such, that rented venues can provide. A geek community center might be a good venue for these. (Cost might well be an issue, though; what we mostly do now doesn’t cost us much.)
We also run a pool party at the Radisson, er, Sheraton most years. That works for me partly because of the size of the space (but it’s still broken into sections, so multiple things can happen at once), the large number of comfortable chairs, and the tradition that a lot of people come even if they don’t attend many other events (the pool may be an influence on this too). I don’t envision a geek community center being at all competitive here (even setting aside the pool); but if there were a space approaching this nice there but cheaper than renting the suites at the hotel (I’m sure we can’t get them to give them to us very often!), using it every couple of months might be nice.
We run a picnic once each summer. Using the picnic spaces at various parks works well for this, I don’t particularly see any benefit to doing this in a community center. Commercial space probably won’t have a lawn to set up a grill on, even.
Conventions, but I don’t think anybody is looking to run their conventions in a geek community center. I list them since they are indeed events Minn-StF runs regularly.
In addition, Minn-StF members do a couple of regular things that are publicized to Minn-StF and elsewhere:
A weekly gaming night. I’ve been to very few of these, but I have the impression one reason this works is because it’s hosted in the home of somebody who owns about eighteen bazillion games. Having access to that collection is important, and hosting it at home makes it much less work (no hauling stuff around, especially food supplies). Also parents may be more willing to let children attend an event people they know are hosting in their home than they are to send them off to some commercial space they don’t know.
A filk night. Haven’t been to that. This might benefit from a different space, I don’t know. Not sure it has any budget, though.
So, overall, I don’t see a strong benefit to a community center for the events Minn-StF is currently involved in. The concom meetings are a possible exception, though at their current size they’re not hard for people to host at home. If the center had really nice social space, two medium sized rooms and three small rooms with comfy chairs and suitable tables and so forth, I might somewhat change my mind about it being interesting for a fraction of the regular social gatherings, maybe 1/3 or 1/4; I don’t consider having those facilities in it to be very likely, though.
Cost is a definite issue; we’re not so flush these days, and what we’re doing now is very cheap. A big increase in expenditure would have to be planned on and coped with somehow; quite a lot of people would have to believe it was worth it to get that to happen.
It occurs to me that one aspect of this may be age differences as they relate to economic position, maybe. I don’t know about the other groups; but nearly everybody who hosts Minn-StF meetings regularly has a good-sized house, and there are quite a few candidates for hosting meetings like that. Then again, Matt and Kelly have hosted a number of meetings in their apartment, and those have worked out very well; having a house doesn’t seem to be a requirement.
July 10, 2009 at 3:39 pm
You really don’t see it? When I see this list, and it may just be my lens of current experience, but I answer “someplace else, like a community center” to virtually every one of these needs, except the conventions, and the pool party. Though now I shall have to add “pool” to my list of desires.
Gaming night at a community center that owns or stores a bazillion donated games. Filk circle in a room that wouldn’t disturb the residential neighbors. Concom meetings for multiple concoms on the same day without paying a dime to Starwood hotels or sweating up someone’s apartment. An outdoor patio with grills and, yes, a lawn.
But when I see these things, I see something that’s already paid for. Not rented space. Not space that presents ongoing cost to partner organizations. Paid for. I’ve said it before, said it elsewhere, and will say it again: capital campaign, please.
My experience is that, below the level of conventions and pool parties, the meetings and parties happening in people’s homes have been far FAR better than the ones happening in commercial spaces. I think I’ve been to dozens of both over the years, not all even in the Twin Cities, and the pattern seems to me to be very consistent.
I very much doubt that a community center would ever accumulate 10% as many games as Richard Tatge has, for example.
Even if you win the lottery and donate the building to begin with, the taxes and maintenance and utilities on as big and nice a space as you have in mind will run into many hundreds of dollars a month, maybe into the low thousands.
And I’d rate the chances of a capital campaign raising $300K as minimal. That’s a random number picked out of the air, of course.
I’m not actually sure if commercial or residential space would suit your goals better. Maybe buying a house works better? I don’t know commercial prices well enough to have any idea. Cheap nice commercial tends to be out in the boonies, too, which means people from the far side of town really suffer, the bus routes are bad, etc.
July 10, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Three Hundred Thousand Dollars? You stuck your finger into the air and pulled out the random number of three hundred thousand dollars? And you called its chances minimal?
I don’t even want to try to do this if we don’t start talking about a capital campaign that seeks much more substantial sums of money than 300k.
Yes, I am serious. More substantial posts will follow on that topic, I promise. But you need to know right now I’m not putting on the table a couple hundred thousand bucks. I want us to stretch out and grab some real money. Grants, community partners, well-to-do non-participants, and our extended personal networks.
I’m challenging us to think about the world “million.” Then pluralizing it.
July 10, 2009 at 4:46 pm
(reposting, since now the reply widget is working)
“My experience is that, below the level of conventions and pool parties, the meetings and parties happening in people’s homes have been far FAR better than the ones happening in commercial spaces.”
Okay, I’ll bite: WHY are they better for being in private vs. public spaces?
More comfortable spaces; more comfortable chairs for example. Tend to be better supplied because it’s easier if your own kitchen is handy, and easier to afford if money isn’t going to the space. Also better-looking spaces, decorated, not institutional, not bare. The presence of people’s stuff gives you things to talk about, ways to start conversations (and not the same stuff each party, since they’re in different homes). Tend to be less noisy since the rooms are smaller and not hard-surfaced. Basically, they’re nicer spaces to live in because people in control of them have set them up to live in as their primary purpose. Also there are inherently actual hosts, which tends to lead to them doing actual hosting.
July 14, 2009 at 1:41 pm
What’s stopping us from having comfortable chairs, nice decorations, or a good game collection? Should we buy furniture from Office Max just because we’re in an office building (if, indeed, we end up in an office building)?
July 10, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Kale — absolutely a great next step would be to envision the “use cases” (pardon the jargon, I’m a business analyst by trade) of the space, and then assess the gaps.
But we want to make sure we consider — like you say — uses that we’ve not currently got going on among all of the existing organizations and think about what other uses a GCC space could make possible.
I like your afterschool program idea.
July 10, 2009 at 11:57 am
If I’m reading this all correctly, the basic idea is that organizations will be pooling resources… things that are common needs for organizations that may be challenging to do individually. Some resources might include:Storage Space – Lots of organization-owned things need storage, event supplies among them. CONvergence rents a couple of PODs for some long-term storage, but that isn’t the best option for some items which are either too fragile for PODs or items which need to be accessed at other times of the year besides convention time.AV Equipment – While we all maintain our own equipment already, it falls under our individual budgets, and not all equipment is used all the time. A combined organization could have really freakin’ nice gear that could get shared between all of the organizations. It would be less gear to maintain, and it would be used more frequently.Administrative Equipment – I’m thinking shared copy machines, walkie-talkies, etc.Support Services – We’ve got a lot of talented people in this community. What if some groups pooled their skills for certain services? One such idea could include a shared web host, and a shared support team that maintains the websites.Offices and Meeting Spaces – Hotel meeting rooms and members’ homes are probably fine for most meetings, but it would be nice to have proper offices for each organization and some conference rooms with wifi.Workshop Spaces – Wouldn’t it be cool to have a costume shop where people could swap ideas, patterns, and sew group projects? What about a scene shop where large scale decorations could be built for conventions and other events? How about a prop shop? Our own computer lab?Bigger Charities – There is nothing wrong with the contributions each organization is already making to the local area. But again, with pooled resources, we could make an even bigger impact.These are just a few ideas off the top of my head, but at least they’re a little more defined than some of our ambiguous discussions. I’d love to hear more suggestions and possibilities.
July 10, 2009 at 12:58 pm
Sounds a lot like what Intermedia Arts Center is doing. Perhaps we should ask how things worked out for them? A lot of geek IT events happen in that venue as they have a fair amount of space and allow catering of food and beverages.
July 10, 2009 at 3:01 pm
I’ve also heard ideas like kitchen/dining facilities, performance space, etc.
I just posted my notes from the Geek Community Center panel, so feel free to look over those and add your feedback.
http://leagueofwonders.wordpress.com/2009/07/10/geek-community-center-panel-notes/
July 13, 2009 at 9:29 pm
Frost, you get it. A big part of what we’re needing at this point is ideas on the kinds of resources people need/want.
More ideas, please!
July 10, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Oh, and about charities — I don’t consider it a high priority, in fact I don’t consider it appropriate, for fan organizations to donate to charites. I approve of charity, but I think it’s politically very dangerous at the organizational level, and I think that individuals are better off making their own charitable contributions. There are very, very few charitable organizations that don’t raise somebodies hackles.
July 10, 2009 at 2:03 pm
It’s a risk I’m comfortable taking–just another difference between you and I probably. I do like charities; and most of all I like giving to our charities. To an extent it’s giving out of our own “enlightened self interests” when we hand Convergence profits to our sisters and brothers in misfits and they make in the schools happen and send someone to space camp. more goals like that, that’s what I want.
Well, yes, it’s nice to be able to give other people’s money to your favorite charities. So long as people agree about the charities, it’s often even nice for everybody.
But, really, why SHOULD my convention membership include a forced donation to an unrelated charity? And with the political diversity of fandom, it’s hard to find something there aren’t people objecting to.
July 10, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Nevertheless, it does—if you attend those conventions that make a profit and turn their profits over to a 501c3, then that’s what you’re getting. Since most of them are up front about that process, the choice is yours.
July 10, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Seems interesting. I’m thinking that something along the lines of a co-op would be what’s needed, but would like to see the vision fleshed out. What exactly would be gained from united fan efforts, over how we interact now?
July 13, 2009 at 3:29 pm
A few URLs that might be useful in this discussion. Here are a couple of pages regarding the MN Fan Alliance Network (MNFAN) meetings.
http://www.freemars.org/mnfan/MN-Fan-Alliance-Network/1999/
http://www.freemars.org/mnfan/MN-Fan-Alliance-Network/2001/
Here’s the home page for the Gordon Dickson Memorial Scholarship Fund.
[I'm the webmaster for the fund.]
[...] give to on a regular basis. Something akin to what Anime Detour Con-Chair Kale Ganann made note of in earlier comments: Is it better to say that since it potentially could be something we don’t want to fund we should [...]
Jon Olsen
Michael Lee
Lex Larson
uberhill
stuckintraffik
July 9, 2009 at 5:32 pm
I imagine such an organization could provide more charity and educational benefits to the area, and would mean events that are even more organized and well-rounded, and would make even bigger waves in the press. I’m especially interested in the idea of a community center.
July 9, 2009 at 6:28 pm
The community center idea, which prompted this idea of a bigger umbrella organization, came from my hopes to move the MISFITS/CVG office to a more multi-purpose space. As we got to talk about some possible uses of a larger space we started talking about other groups using it too. Which got us to asking “Why are we in control of a space everyone will use? Why not make a new group that other organizations can join and we all work together for something bigger?”
Well, that’s the short version anyway. And I think it’s a great first venture for any new umbrella organization. But the new organization has to get up and running first, which may take several years before it even starts looking for a community center.
Which means I still think we need a new MISFITS/CVG office. We’ve simply out grown the existing one.