[FC-discuss] FreeCulture.org is now Students for Free Culture

[Gavin Baker]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Christina Xu wrote:
> There is the matter, of course, of the fact that there aren't
> necessarily a large number of students interested in the topics at all
> schools. I remember there being a lot of discussion about how best to
> help small chapters, and IMHO that is to reach out to other members of
> the community who are not necessarily students.

The best way to help small chapters is to build an organization that can
help them effectively, which is why we wrote the bylaws.

If there aren't a lot of students interested in the topics, that's
exactly why Students for Free Culture exists. Chapters should build a
network of interested people, but that's only one aspect. Another
aspect, maybe the more important one, is outreach to people who don't
know anything. Evangelize!

> And while we're at it, how are we describing student? Or university? 
> Harvard has an Extension school where people who aren't necessarily 
> college-student-age can attend without having to be full-time
> students. And what about alumni? Alumni of those extension schools?
> People between college and grad school (as you were yourself until
> very recently)? I'm not pro-watering-down necessarily, but it seems
> to me that we're working with very vague definitions already.

Alumni are not students. People between college and grad school are
alumni, and not students.

A college or university is a degree-granting institution. We've also had
high school chapters, and I see no reason not to include high school
students, but I would prioritize outreach on colleges, as I'd expect
better results.

Extension schools are an interesting question, but we can cross that
bridge when we come to it.

For the most part, we know what a college or university is, and we know
who is a student at those institutions. That's our primary audience.

Nobody's said "never talk to anyone who's not a college student". Do
whatever community outreach you want. But the emphasis should be on
organizing students.

Brian Rowe wrote:
> My memory of the drafting sessions was that chapter have the power to
> determine chapter members.  We do not define student but left that to
> the chapter.  See Article V section 1.1.1 "Members of any chapter (as
> defined by the chapter)" for an example.  See also:
>
>
> Article III: Definitions, Section 1.1 Terms, Member of a chapter. A 
> member of a chapter is an individual who holds membership in a 
> chapter of the Organization. A chapter may determine its own 
> procedures for membership in that chapter.
>
> The by-law were not meant to micro manage chapters.  Chapters will
> define members differently, and I think this is a strength, allowing
> flexibility for differing needs.

I disagree. This is one of my least favorite parts of the bylaws.
However, I expect most chapters will define members as students (at some
colleges, this is mandatory). I hope in the future the bylaws will be
amended to name members as students. It's not micro-managing to define
your constituency.

> Alumni are an interesting question. I personally think Alumni are an 
> amazing resource to the org. I would recommend that chapters keep 
> alumni list and call on them for help with projects. A national
> Alumni program could help connect Free Culture friendly professionals
> or scholars to work together on project. An advisory board of alumni 
> could help with knowledge transfer from old board members to new
> board members.

I strongly support the formation of an alumni network for the
(inter)national organization, which preferably chapters could call upon
as well. I have offered to help work on this with others interested.

MJ Ray wrote:
> As I understand it, iCommons has anti-commercialism
> written into its foundations (thereby closing it off from artists who
> need to make money from their free culture creations), uses hum-votes
> to makes decisions and doesn't record its meetings.

Anti-commercialism couldn't be further from the truth; their 2006 summit
was sponsored by Microsoft. They didn't have as-offensive sponsors this
year, but commercialism is definitely welcomed.

Transparency and community involvement in governance is not iCommons'
strong suit. They are trying to address this, but progress is
maddeningly slow. (Not to say we're perfect.)

iCommons is not really a membership organization. (Technically, it is,
because I believe CC is the only current member. I think the plan is to
add a few more organizations as members. But individuals are not
members.) To the community, it provides: its annual summit, its
user-contributed and -edited Web site, its discussion lists, its IRC
channel. The summit is limited to about 300 attendees, so it's
relatively exclusive, and IIRC a registration fee is charged (although
scholarships, including travel and accommodations, are offered to a good
many). There are no geographic chapters or meetups (though Heather Ford
and Jimmy Wales are encouraging people to organize parties worldwide).
Whatever you think of iCommons, it's not really a grassroots
organization, and not really the non-student-specific complement of SFC.

> If there must be another "open and free culture" group, then we'll get
> there eventually, but there's a natural desire to avoid duplication of
> overheads.  It's disappointing to see so many missed opportunities and
> this vital task left to telling the Crosbies of this world to go DIY,
> instead of incorporating their support into your efforts.

Nobody has asked anyone to leave this mailing list, which (with few
exceptions) is the only way in which non-students have been involved
previously.

Just as membership in EFF is limited to paying members, but anyone can
be a supporter, everyone is welcomed to continue to support Students for
Free Culture.

This list is a community list, on which anyone is invited to participate
(respectfully: spammers, trolls, etc. not welcome). If/when we do public
campaigns, everyone will be encouraged to participate. If/when we accept
donations, sell T-shirts, etc., these will available to anyone. And so
forth. But the primary purpose of the organization will continue to be
to support chapters in campus organizing.

Also, what overhead are we trying to avoid duplicating? We've got a Web
site, a history, and some bright volunteers -- that's about it. Insofar
as there are (or will be) volunteers/staff, they have their hands full
with student outreach (or will). It's not like there are resources we
could meaningfully commit to non-student outreach -- and, for the
forseeable future, if the possibility even existed, it would certainly
be a zero sum situation, and in that situation we shouldn't prioritize
non-student outreach over student outreach (because of the unique value
of student outreach, and because non-student outreach is outside our
core competencies).

I think we have the domain freeculture.net, which has previously been
offered for someone who wants to put it to a non-student use.

Timothy Cowlishaw wrote:
> On a more general note however, I'm a little disappointed by this  
> decision. While I recognise the value of having student focused FC  
> chapters at Unversities, intentionally limiting FC.org (who I,  
> rightly or wrongly ,have viewed as a sort of general 'umbrella  
> organisation' for the FC movement) to campus-based chapters seems to  
> be excluding a large proportion of (y)our supporter base.

This view was wrong. The new Web site bears the tagline "students for
free culture" (and of course, this is now the organization's name). The
old Web site bore the tagline "an international student movement for
free culture". Seems clear to me. But obviously there had been some
confusion, and it wasn't immediately clear from the name. Now it is.

> Since the  
> bylaws were ratified by your campus-based chapters many who had been  
> active FC.org supporters were excluded from the decision-making  
> process by virtue of being non-students or students of universities  
> without an FC chapter (both in the US and Internationally), and to  
> systematically vote what is (as far as i can tell) a significant  
> proportion of FC's supporter-base out of the organisation (without  
> giving them a chance to voice their own views on the matter) seems  
> rather counter-productive.

The bylaws were ratified by campus chapters because chapters have always
been the members of the organization. However, the bylaws were open to
public discussion (having been posted on the blog, wiki, IRC channel,
and this list), and several non-students did participate.

This move has not excluded anyone from SFC's supporter base (at least,
not intentionally). Everyone is welcome to continue to support us. But
the organization will be governed and led by, and focus its outreach on,
students.

To anyone who wants a non-student-specific grassroots free culture
organization, find me funding and I will create it. (I'm serious --
contact me off-list.)
- --
Gavin Baker
Students for Free Culture
http://freeculture.org/
gavin at freeculture.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHA12YtLXQdLhFpekRAsX9AJ0ZQQ+cl7d2dCnkHhhckjJa6O4+RACgiENz
PO+pTpnAFz51Ig0/79k9bWc=
=Y/3s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----