|
Grex > Coop9 > #7: Members with more than one vote |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 186 responses total. |
rcurl
|
|
response 159 of 186:
| 
May 14 05:52 UTC 1997 |
There may be a significant use of Grex by non-profit organizations, who
would likely be glad to support the organization with dues. I can see this
as a very mutually beneficial interaction. However if an organization
is considered inferior (or unethical, as suggested above), there is not
much basis for suggesting organizational support.
|
mdw
|
|
response 160 of 186:
|
May 14 06:00 UTC 1997 |
I know one person in the local community who is (a) rich, and (b) almost
certainly has several dozen corporations registered under his name. I
have no special reason to believe this person would wish anything less
than the best for grex. Nevertheless, I know this person *is* a person
who *delights* in tweaking "the system". I know, beyond a shadow of a
doubt, that if this person ever got seriously annoyed with grex, and
knew he could buy a lot of votes with his various organizations, that
grex would be sunk. Fortunately, this person is usually after much
larger fish, like the university of michigan, or the phone company.
Grex is simply too small for him to bother.
Nevertheless, I am absolutely convinced that we do not want to extend
voting rights to organizations. This is, of course, predicated on the
assumption that we want to serve, first & foremost, the interests of
individual users. If we extend voting rights to organizations, then we
are giving them a direct voice in decisions that might favour
organizations over individual users. No doubt, all of the people
involved in the Magical Education Council of Ann Arbor and Rane's
organizations are up front honest and forthcoming folk who would never
ever let personal agendas or corporate interests override those of grex.
Still, it is a *fact* that there are "sharks" out there both in the
for-profit world, *and* in the not for profit world, who are very
successful in terms of advancing hidden private agendas. These people
often become board members or gain other influential positions within
organizations (almost by definition). I don't care if these persons
become private members. I'm not real worried about these people
registering and voting as fradulent "dead people from Chicago". But, I
don't want to give these people an open door via legitimately
registering as N different corporations.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 161 of 186:
|
May 14 19:28 UTC 1997 |
I too would like to keep membership on Grex to living human beings. Any
organization that I belong to that would like to support Grex could easily
make a cash donation as a supporting gesture. Unless a corporation *wants*
to influence Grex policy through their vote, in which case we wander into
mdw's swamp, there is no need for them to join. If they are looking for a
cheap ISP, I suggest we all work to find or set up a home for small,
not-for-profits that *Is Not Grex*. Since voting and telnet are the only
member 'benefits', there is no other reason to join instead of donating.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 162 of 186:
|
May 15 06:11 UTC 1997 |
There are some advantages to Grex to attract non-profits as members. Grex
can always use more support and non-profits would be good members as they
have an understanding of non-profit operation (such as Grex), might
attract some of their members to membership, and could be encouraged to fw
new and interesting conferences in their activity areas.
The question can be posed, how can Grex attract non-profits as members or
donors? Nothing is being done now to do so. How does grex attract *anyone*
as a donor? I would say it doesn't, except when there is a specific
fundraiser. What attracts donors otherwise is essentially only membership.
[cmgee raises the notion that non-profits shouldn't even use Grex. But any
use of Grex by a non-profit is managed by an individual. Is she suggesting
that even though the use of Grex by an individual on behalf of a
non-profit is within all existing guidelines, there should be a new policy
to forbid such use?]
My proposal for a voting membership category for non-profit corporations
isn't receiving any support, so I will pose the question otherwise: how
can these *very good citizens* be attracted to support Grex? Just waiting
for them to do so is not likely to work (it does not work with the 14,000
non-member users of Grex). Some sort of identity or recognition of these
very special users is all I can think of. If not membership on the par
with individuals with a vote, what else would be attractive?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 163 of 186:
|
May 15 18:19 UTC 1997 |
The possibility of a "raid" on grex by corporate members with a vote, as
envisaged by Marcus in #160, is *extremely* remote, if not impossible.
There are a number of factors that mitigate against it: it is expensive at
$60 each (not that grex couldn't use the money.. ;->; there is nothing to
be gained (grex's real assets are negligible); it would take more
corporations than I bet that guy has to influence an election; the
strategy would be public and I'm sure the rest of grex membership would
turn against it; the staff would not cooperate; and even giving a vote, it
would be easy to erect a defense in advance (for example, require that all
non-profit members have different resident agents).
I've been around a number of small non-profits that give the vote to
non-profit (and even profit) corporate members, and I've never heard of
any hanky panky. The only threat entailed in this is when a non-profit has
very large assets - millions of dollars - when the expensive of a
corporate raid has potential payoff. I know one case where such a
non-prfoit converted from a membership base to a shareholder base with the
nboard deciding who can buy the shares. Grex is the most unlikely target
imaginable.
In one membership-based non-profit for which I was a cofounder and am a
current trustee, the Institutional members (with votes) are a federal
National Forest, a community museum, a county soil and water conservation
district, a university club, and another non-profit with similiar goals.
These associatons have all been very mutually beneficial, and not just
because they provide additional monetary support. What is really the
benefit is 'networking' - non-profits working together with other
non-profits for mutual benefits. This is what happens in the real world
|
mdw
|
|
response 164 of 186:
|
May 16 03:42 UTC 1997 |
Rane must circulate in a better atmosphere than I do. I've *seen* such
hanky-panky, more than once, from the commercial world ($10 million), to
the small scale (local "for fun" clubs). While money is often the
motive, it is not always - there *are* plenty of people who get off on
power trips.
Pure malevolent mischief is not the only reason we should be concerned.
It is entirely possible to get the same outcome without any malevolence.
First one or two non-profits set up shop here, and find life good.
Friends tell friends, and a few other non-profits show up, and start
helping the system. Non-profit people use their board experience to run
for the grex board. Meetings are run in a more "professional" manner.
Outside funding is found to supplement chronically short membership
donations. Special projects are undertaken to support the needs of
non-profits. It is very possible for the balance of power to shift in
just such an evolutionary fashion, entirely guided by good intentions.
Once it happened, it would be hard to undo. How do you replace
substantial non-member corporate funding? How do you make your voice
heard at board meetings run by RRO, when none of the board members wants
to listen to you?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 165 of 186:
|
May 16 05:03 UTC 1997 |
Your scenario doesn't sound so bad at all.. ;->. That's approximately how
non-profits in the real world go about attaining their objectives. Having
people from non-profits with an interest in grex sounds good, and nothing
wrong with them running for the board if they get member support. The
meetings could sure stand being more efficient and also address the real
issues confronting grex apart from staff matters. Outside funding sounds
good too, but that would be very slow developing, no matter how much more
'professional' the board is. Grex needs more special projects to take
advantage of the talents of the members, for furthering the purposes of
grex. Now..."balance of power"...between what? Up to this point, Grex
would just have a more diversified board, maybe. Who's fighting whom?
Nobody. There would be more ideas and more options, and the members get
to discuss and decide them all. The board would listen to anyone with
ideas and suggestions, and I don't see much chance of "substanial
non-member corporate funding", simply because other non-profits are
limited by monetary resources just like grex.
But there would be infusions of membership dues, and an infusion of
talented and dedicated people from many activities.
|
mdw
|
|
response 166 of 186:
|
May 16 06:41 UTC 1997 |
The problem is that's not really the mission grex was originally
designed to address. Grex was designed to be a public access system for
individual *people*, not *corporations*, no matter how deserving. In a
sense, what you're asking for is almost like taking an apartment
building, and turning it into the New Center.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 167 of 186:
|
May 16 16:55 UTC 1997 |
This is getting overblown (and I contributed to it in #165 by making it
sound like more would happen than would).
I am suggesting that small, poor, non-profits andmembers of non-profits
are already using grex to assist them in their volunteer activities. If
grex could more specifically recognize this small group of users by
accepting the non-profits as (say) "institutional members", some of these
small non-profits are likely to join to support grex. That would be a few
more dollars in grex's coffers, which we are not likely to attract
otherwise. *In addition*, there would be possible other benefits through
the mutual associations, although I would guess that not in most cases.
But some mutual benefits might be very valuable to grex and its associated
non-profits: who can tell?
A survey to determine what non-profits are using grex, and how, might be
useful. It could be conducted via the motd, and request that non-profits
or volunteers with non-profits using grex contact an individual. That
individual could have a short questionnaire to determine some things about
each non-profit (purpose, number of members, how grex is being used, etc),
and whether they would consider supporting grex with a membership, if an
"institutional" membership were available.
|
aruba
|
|
response 168 of 186:
|
May 16 19:06 UTC 1997 |
Well, that survey sounds like a good idea, Rane. Are you volunteering? :)
I mostly agree with Marcus that Grex's mission has been a meeting place for
people, run by people for the purposes of establishing a community. I don't
know that making a corporate membership non-voting has to make it seem like a
"second-class" membership, especially since such members probably wouldn't
want to vote anyway, as you said.
I like the idea of Grex being useful to non-profits, though. Perhaps what we
should do is to try to make Grex as useful to non-profits as possible, but
rather than recruit the non-profits themselves as members, try to recruit the
people behind the corporations. It seems like they might be ideal candidates
for becoming involved in Grex's community, and eventually supporting it.
Maybe not, I don't know.
|
janc
|
|
response 169 of 186:
|
May 16 20:14 UTC 1997 |
I'd do the following:
(1) make a web page listing all Grex members (except any who request not
to be listed). Sort of a public "Grex thanks..." thing.
(2) create a catagory of non-voting corporate memberships. They'd be listed
on the page, and their organizational Grex accounts would be internet
enabled, but they could not vote.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 170 of 186:
|
May 16 20:55 UTC 1997 |
Leave my name off any web page of grex members. Let 'em create an account
on grex and figure out how to access the "members" command, if they can...
|
rcurl
|
|
response 171 of 186:
|
May 16 21:21 UTC 1997 |
Are thre any objections to my doing a survey?
|
remmers
|
|
response 172 of 186:
|
May 16 21:49 UTC 1997 |
Re #170: If they create an account using webnewuser and then
access grex exclusively from backtalk, they won't be able to use
the 'members' command, because they won't ever telnet here.
|
valerie
|
|
response 173 of 186:
|
May 17 02:58 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 174 of 186:
|
May 17 04:37 UTC 1997 |
Here is my draft survey. The first item goes into the motd. The survey
is a response to mail received.
motd notice:
NON-PROFIT CORPORATE USERS - please send e-mail to rcurl to be included in
a survey of use of Grex by such organizations. -rcurl
Message for responders:
Thank you for responding to my note in the motd. Grex is aware that a
number of non-profit corporations, or members of such corporations, are
using Grex for e-mail, web pages and other communications. There is a
discussion now (Item 7 in the coop conference) of the desirability of
creating a class of "institutional membership" just for non-profit
corporations, to both recognize their importance in our community, and to
facilitate their supporting Grex with dues. First, though, we have to know
who are the non-profit users of Grex, and a little about their needs.
I would appreciate it if a representative of your non-profit corporation
would fill in the following questionnaire, and return it to me.
1. Would it be OK for the information you provide to be identified by your
corporation, or would you wish not to be identified in the public record?
2. What is the name of your non-profit corporation, and what are its
purposes?
3. Are you director or member based, and if member based, how many members
do you have?
4. How is your grex account being used?
file archive
e-mail
forwarding mail to a group
topical conferencing
telnet access to other servers
5. About how many members of your organization are members of Grex?
6. Would your organization be interested in joining Grex as
some kind of "institutional member"?
7. If the answer is yes, would the organization having a vote for
Grex directors be important?
8. Would there be any services that Grex might provide specifically to
"institutional members" that would facilitate their operations?
Thank you for your time.
Rane L. Curl
|
dang
|
|
response 175 of 186:
|
May 17 17:53 UTC 1997 |
I like it. Suggestion: Start a new item about it. This one is a bit long,
with lots of stuff not quite in this topic.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 176 of 186:
|
May 17 18:51 UTC 1997 |
I have started a new item, picking up from response #162 in this one.
|
arthurp
|
|
response 177 of 186:
|
May 17 23:39 UTC 1997 |
Maybe 'dues' should be changed to donations?
|
albaugh
|
|
response 178 of 186:
|
May 19 16:42 UTC 1997 |
Re: #172: Exactly! Unregistered readers have no need to see who the
[registered] grex members are, AFAIC.
|
remmers
|
|
response 179 of 186:
|
May 19 18:32 UTC 1997 |
Eh? I was talking about *registered* users who access Grex
exclusively via the web.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 180 of 186:
|
May 20 15:50 UTC 1997 |
So you were. Well, if you could implement a cgi to invoke the members
command and return as a web page *to registered readers only*, that would have
the same effect as telling telnet users to run it for themselves.
|
remmers
|
|
response 181 of 186:
|
May 20 19:10 UTC 1997 |
Let's see, what would be the point of making the membership list
hard to get at? Think I missed that.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 182 of 186:
|
May 20 20:21 UTC 1997 |
Places that cater to the rich and famous usually keep a lid on their
memberships lists. That also applies to non-profits that have big benefactors
as members. The object is to reduce notoriety and annoyances for such members
(who are more likely to be subject to it than us plebians). Well, you
asked.....
|
remmers
|
|
response 183 of 186:
|
May 20 23:11 UTC 1997 |
Yes, but what does that have to do with us? "Catering to the
rich and famous" is not exactly the first phrase that comes to
mind when I think of Grex.
|