That said, there’s some noteworthy changes in the Minnesota Society for Interest in Science Fiction—where until recently this writer was on the Board of Directors and served as Vice President for a few months in 2009.

It’s been mentioned in several different communication organs that the Society changed our structure, so here’s what happened:

1. CONvergence was spun off into its own 501c3 nonprofit organization.
2. The current directors of the convention make up the board of the new organization, Convergence Events, Incorporated
3. The Society bylaws were changed to reflect this by reducing the number of Society board members to five.
4. A basic partnership has been agreed to between the two organizations.

Additionally, there have been board of directors elections in both organizations, and new people will soon step up to take on these service roles.

In the meantime, the two organizations have each designated some of our representatives to talk with Anime Detour about a mutual event, storage, and office space. A joint committee representing all three groups has made significant headway. This “Facilities Transition Committee” performed needs analysis and has researched potential locations. Right now the only talk has been lease, not buy. No doubt that joint body will report back to the three participants with recommendations soon.

Why does any of this matter?

Conceptually speaking, the league has begun. Not simply because there’s two organizations working in concert where before there was one—though that’s noteworthy. Not just because three groups have entered serious conversations about sharing space—and that’s also noteworthy.

Outside observers might roll their eyes—”you’re changing. you’re doing some shared backend. yawn.” BUT! These are geek-friendly, volunteer-run organizations. Historically such organizations have been change averse. To see the possibility of change and the realities of change embraced by our people in the way they have been is remarkable.

Often change aversion is perfectly justified. And each of us also knows the challenges of adapting to change, of making decisions appropriately, and promoting new things while preserving traditions. We possess a seriousness about the stewardship of our community resources and common responsibilities. We also know the experience of struggling to acquaint each other with change—and the occasions when traditions begin to change into unreconciled opposition.

If you could have been on the ground at the public meetings and recent elections, you would see interest and excitement around these joint ventures. Because people in our organizations have shown high amounts of energy and undisguised enthusiasm for the changes. I banked on the possibility of that enthusiasm, and so far it’s exceeded expectations.

As an early and vocal advocate for the spinning off of Convergence and MISFITS, I have unreserved excitement for the new way of relating to each other. I have said that in dividing one way and reconnecting in another, we give each other the best chance to tightly focus on our evolving missions. And we open new faces of the two as connection points to our broader community.

Also, and I at least speak for Convergence here, we are supremely excited to try out this shared space project with Anime Detour. What an opportunity! I would like to see us avoid paternal behaviors toward other conventions—I think Convergence has a golden chance to show leadership in such a cultural shift—and recognize the role they deserve to play in the area. (Plus they’re the biggest convention in town, after all!) We share many common bonds and there’s ample reason to combine our strengths where it makes sense.

If you haven’t been there to see it, get to a public meeting of one of the organizations talked about here. Ask around. There’s a lot of people expecting and embracing challenges, rather than balking at the possibility of change. The energy level is high, and the talks are about possibilities. This is the hope of our vision: that we look for commonalities, exploit those commonalities, and grow. It’s happening already. How about that?

One of the things that I’ve found in some of my recent conversations about this blog is that it is worth pointing out that we’re talking about a long term dream.   Right now we’re still talking about the $35 initial payment into the building fund.  My hope here is to try something constructive for our communities — and that’s going to take some time to figure it out.  But in LA eventually $35 became $2000, and it can grow from there.

I like “Onward and Upward” as well.

In a recent post about Organizing Customers, he describes the expense of negotiating the rights for Grease for small community theaters.

This strikes me as being very relevant to our discussions here. As a community, we do lots of things as a group — we obtain music and film rights for our events. We buy soda and snack food. We might outsource website development. We need high-powered lights and sound equipment. We need facilities for conventions and meeting facilities of a variety of sizes and shapes. We order t-shirts and other merchandise items. We rent storage pods and lockers. We have space needs and desires. Now there certainly should be independence — each event and group is different — but there are certainly some common causes where it is useful to collaborate.

Looking at all of this at once turns into an enormous problem. But if we look at this in little pieces? Break it down, spread it out and make it manageable?

Then it’s all very possible.

Close your eyes.

Tell me what you see.

“Darkness” and “My eyelids” are not helpful.  I can see I need to
explain.

A lot of the posts and comments on here are about a building, and I
think that’s a shame.  While the Community Center is a great idea, I
think the organization that uses the building is a better one.  A
building is brick and mortar, a thing, but nothing more.  Oh sure, it
can be a very useful thing, but in the end, who cares?

But an organization, fueled by ideas, now that is something I can get
behind.  Something I can fight for.  So let me tell you what I see when
I close my eyes.

I see school buses, bringing in kids for afterschool programs.  I see
robotics clubs and cultural workshops, anime viewings and game sessions.
I see teachers getting to run some of the enrichment and arts programs
that our school funding lacks.  I see the next generation of fandom,
being brought up in a place that is open and accepting, even nurturing.

I see cross-cultural initiatives, artists and actors and writers and
costumers and all these related but disparate groups being brought
together to create something greater than they could do alone.  Taking
their ideas and their disciplines to a level they hadn’t even begun yet
to dream.

I see something larger than our selves.

I see community.

But that’s just one vision.  One voice.  And a community cannot thrive
on a single voice alone.  I understand Jon and Michael and everyone here
has a vision too, a vision that’s more than just a building.  But they
also understand that they’re just a part of what they’re trying to
create here.  They’re smart enough to know that for a community to work,
you need many voices.  And so, they’ve held back.  Because they want to
foster the discussion.  Because they don’t want to impose just their
vision.

I’ve heard people say that this could never work, because fandom is just
a hobby.  I disagree.

Those of you who know me know I work on Anime Detour, and have been
involved in that community for some time now.  And Anime is just a
hobby.  But, like many other branches of fandom, it is a hobby that
revolves around a medium which celebrate ideas.  That has heroes and
morals and lofty ideals.  Ideals we, as fans, aspire to.  Ideals we,
when given the opportunity, will embrace and ennoble.  Because we want
to be those heroes.

And that’s what’s being offered.

The chance to work towards not just admiring those ideals, but living
them, passing them on to other generations.  Heroes breeding heroes.

Community building like this is, in small scale, a form of saving the
world, a person at a time.  It is giving people who have no place a
home.  It is giving people who have no friends a family.  It is coming
together to celebrate what is best about all of us.  It’s about
understanding what makes all of us stand together.

But to do that it’s needs all our voices.  It is a song that needs not a
singer, but a chorus.

So.

One more time…

Close your eyes.

Tell me what you see.

Video produced & directed by Tadao Tomomatsu, filmed on location at the Los Angeles Science Fiction Society Clubhouse. Uploaded and linked with Tadao’s permission and that of Mr. Stevens and Dr. Pournelle.

As always, we are appreciative of examples outside of the SF Community in our local area, and one great example is the Quatrefoil Library.

And one major discussion point was the library functions — we have many pieces of material that are out there, some that belong to individual organizations, but others that may belong to organizations that no longer exist as well.

And one advantage of a central space is that there are elements of our shared history; for example, reference was made to items in Mn-stf’s library about the reasons why the “serious” Minneapolis in ’73 Worldcon bid folded.  And the shadow of the Minneapolis in ’73 bid is large.

The discussion focused on several positive points.  As our first public discussion outside of CONvergence, it was emphasized that building trust amongst the organizations is going to be a big challenge.  The perception that different organizations don’t trust or respect each other is certainly out there and it has already been mentioned here, and is something that I am sure we will have further discussions and the organization will have to consider.   There have already been good thoughts on this.

One thing that we need to work out is how organizations of different sizes and resources work together — we want and desire participation from a wide variety of groups of different sizes and financial resources.

However, one of the challenges pointed out is that we aren’t looking at a commune either — we need to make sure that the dishes get washed.

Our favorite suggestion was one where it was suggested that a community center is too small and we should be considering a small town with a helipad.   But as has pointed out, if we’re looking at Leagues instead of Societies, in a 1000 years we will be Legion…

Compared to something like San Diego Comic Con — which could fit the size of CONvergence’s membership into one room — we’re all still small stuff.   4,000 people?  That is nothing when you’re looking at 40,000- or 125,000-person events.

I’ve been looking at some of the footage from San Diego last weekend, and it’s really incredible how the one event becomes the center of the entertainment culture for a weekend.  And while it is called “Comic Con”, it really is a “geek pop culture” event.

But my experience is that size isn’t the only thing with bearing on the quality of the event. One of the values that I share in this discussion is that we are putting on participatory activities—we want to build a culture and environment where people are encouraged to engage with their passions. The community that we want to build and maintain is one of a participatory culture around our entertainment sources.   That’s true whether you are involved in some sort of cosplay or having a writing workshop.

I want to keep the traditions of our community going—so many of the events in this area are member-and-participant driven. I can’t predict the future, and I don’t know where the community will take us.

In Norse mythology, Fafnir was turned into a dragon to better protect the treasure. But the dragon is a symbol of greed in Norse mythology — and something of which to be wary. And for good reason.  Could CONvergence turn into Fafnircon?  A Dragon*Con of the north?  Is that what we want? If it is not (and I’m inclined to think it isn’t) — what are the best ways to keep our community healthy and sustainable?

One way I see of doing this is encouraging more things—CONvergence isn’t designed to be the only convention in this metro area, and for some people, it’s going to be too big, or too noisy, or too long.  As a community we have multiple events; and we spread it around the calendar year.

Saturday, August 1
2:00-2:55 PM
Krushenko’s Annex (Northern Pacific)
Brainstorming Discussion: Geek Community Center
What would you like in a hypothetical Geek Community Center? Through the leagueofwonders.org blog, some of us are starting to gather the requirements and dreams for a new broad community organization (including members of many independent SF-related groups) for some really big community dreams, including a community center or clubhouse.

Michael Lee, mod.

(This will not be the last discussion we have on this subject if you can’t make it!)

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

The revenue sharing matter is one that needs additional thought and detail. It probably should have gone to the top of the list above, so I’ll discuss it now.

One comparison that’s been mentioned is a kind of “Geek United Way.” In other words, combine the contributions and volunteerism of our communities of imagination, along with those of other community partners, into a substantial cross-boundary effort that enables projects of greater size.

We would like to make an organization that fundraising organizations and non-profits would be proud to 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 walk away, or should we pariticpate in the discussion and see if it can’t become something we would want to fund?

We want to build something to which you want to contribute.

Some additional points on revenue sharing as a concept: mutual benefits. In one sense, if these organizations raise profits, those profits need to go somewhere or they’ll have to pay taxes. It’s been pointed out that both CONvergence and Anime Detour make profits. They do both fund year round activities.

What if those year round activities took place in partnership with this league? What if the MISFITS educational initiatives and community events took place in a shared building environment? MISFITS would bring a highly valuable track record (and face it, respectable imprimatur!) of community service, and both they and this league entity would share the benefit scheduling events in league property.

(Not well known: CONvergence is not the only fundraiser for MISFITS, it is simply the largest. MISFITS does other activities which in time may grow to increase their coffers, and they will no doubt find themselves able to donate to other organizations if they chose to. )

Having a large, but accessible community partner in the area would be of vital benefit to small, one-shot, or startup non-profit fan/community groups. The ability to share revenues from multiple streams with startups would be markedly increased by bringing them together in one place. In some instances it would alleviate the burden of some of the fundraisers from searching! There’s also the opportunity for fiscal sponsorship of the kind described by our friends at Springboard for the Arts.

Trying to build this project into a trusted partner for a multitude of groups is very intentional. I hold a hope that instead of simply asking everybody to ‘just get along’, we make diffuse the focus on partners’ personal animosities/competitions, and sharpen the focus on something that we relate to on our own terms.

Thus we instantiate a virtual community center as important as a material one. That is to say, a center construed as a center point. One made real in organizational structure before we make it a substantial building or complex.

Well to get there would require money, and a fairly sizable amount of it, flowing fairly regularly. In addition to league driven fundraising (which would need to be substantial), we would seek additional revenue in donations from partner organizations that are able to make them.

Now to the other matters. To think about how partners would engage with this league, I’ll keep it simple and sweet: participation is not mandatory.

This is a fairly important value to embrace. It’s essential that partner organizations retain autonomy and that the new structure (league, community, etc) also be autonomous. (Hence the ironic title, “cake or death?” Yes? Yes?)

Organizations’ affiliation would only be as permanent as their ongoing leadership decisions allow. However, I believe it would also be important to protect this partner entity by asking that contracts be signed between affiliating organizations and this one, and that dissolution of partnerships would come with a clause requiring notice. Well, this would give a much stronger basis for activities of the third party entity, because it could look ahead to exclude those “not-yet-lost” revenues from its planning, or choose to do its own fundraising on that need basis.

What this means would be …let’s say CONvergence entered into a partnership agreement. And let’s say CONvergence committed to share a set portion of our revenues with this entity in 2010 and 2011, let’s say $7,000. If this new body has a fiscal year from June to June and CONvergence decides it wants out of the agreement, it must honor its 2010 contract, and notify the “league entity” of its self-removal intent not later than June 2010.

Some people are probably wondering why. Well if this new body is charged with a mandate to conduct activities on behalf of its partners, and it’s receiving a portion of its funding from these partners, it needs to have planning time to adjust for revenue alterations.

Furthermore, the question might occur “what about those amounts? wouldn’t we just ask organizations to give what they can give?” I would challenge this community, the participating organizations, and this new potential model, to set aside that thinking and be more structured. Let partner organizations commit to a precise amount, and then give them plenty of time to raise it—whether their normal event does the trick or if they choose to do additional activities. Suppose CONvergence committed to an agreement of $14,000, seven grand in each year, and lost money in 2010? (it’s partly my job to ensure we don’t, by the way) We could still come through on our contractual commitments through other fundraising efforts outside of the convention.

So let’s take aim. At an organization that people will want to support. At connecting without worrying after the internal affairs of partners. At preserving the core values of participants, while promoting additional community values that support, not supplant them. At something new and capable of staying alive and carrying out our bigger dreams.

to connect organizations for challenging collaborations that support charitable activities and improve relationships in diverse communities of imagination throughout the upper Midwest.

Do you see how that merges with/emerges from the principles that I suggested earlier?
We choose to connect over the fact of our passions, even where the sources differ.
We embrace openmindedness and imagination.
We seek participatory activities.
We enjoy challenge.
Community is worth building.