Important News - Special General Meeting - June 18th

[Dave Chanter]

Hello All,

We are announcing a Special General Meeting (SGM) for members of the Connected Community Hackerspace. This meeting is to announce and vote into effect important changes to our Rules of Association and our Fee Structure.

First, we are proposing some common sense amendments to the Rules of Association. These changes are designed to strengthen the committee process and you can read them below.

Secondly, and more importantly, we have concluded that CCHS must raise facility fees. Our current projection is that without action, CCHS will fail to pay its operational expenses this calendar year. As it is a big change, we are putting this to a vote and we want to be very clear and transparent about what voting for or against the fee change means.

Voting for the change to our fees means that our operational expenses will be covered in full by our membership fees. This will enable CCHS to focus proceeds of any grants or additional funds into the purchase of tools, machinery and supplies to benefit members.

Voting against the change will put the future operation of CCHS at risk. Without trying to be dramatic, the committee will be forced to attempt to raise funds in an alternative manner. The focus of those efforts would be to pay the rent and not on improving the space. These circumstances mean any shortfall could result in closure.

The proposed fee structure is described below.

It is our hope that you will attend this meeting and lend your voice to ensure that our great HackerSpace can continue to grow and improve. If you have concerns please voice them; the committee are happy to hear and discuss with you before the SGM.

Special General Meeting

Date: 18th June 2013

Time: 7:00pm to 8:00pm

Location: CCHS - 5 Kent Lane

Who: All CCHS financial members

Agenda

• Update from the committee
  
• Review changes to ROA and vote for acceptance
  
• Review changes to fee structure and vote for acceptance
  

ROA Changes

Change Section 20.3 from:

(b) two ordinary members—

to read:

(b) no less than two but no greater than four ordinary members.

Addition to Section 24, RE: Inactive Committee members:

If you are:

• unable or unwilling to participate in the committee process.
  
• unable or unwilling to accept (be assigned) actions from the committee.
  

then your position may be declared vacant by vote of the committee and you can be replaced in accordance with the existing rules. 

New Membership Fee Structure

Membership

Membership makes you a member of our community, grants access to the facilities, events, tools and reasonable usage of consumables.

Standard        $60 per month

Concession    $30 per month

Casual           $10 per visit

Key Policy

A key is a privilege in our community earned through communal trust and by meeting some simple requirements. There is no additional cost and any standard or concession membership holder can apply for this privilege but must meet the requirements which will be outlined in time for the SGM.

Guardian/Minor Fee Policy

As we require a parent or guardian to supervise a minor in our facilities, a parent or guardian and a minor are collectively counted as a single member for the purpose of membership fees, if only one person (i.e. either the parent or the minor) wants to use the hackerspace. In the case where both the guardian and the minor are utilising the facilities and consumables, both will be requested to pay fees as is appropriate.

Hardship Policy

If you feel that due to personal circumstances the fee structure is out of your reach you are invited to write to the committee for special consideration. The committee will consider each petition on a case by case basis, but please be prepared that certain privileges such as Key access may be denied you.  Please consider the following criteria.

• Source of hardship (general terms will do)
  
• What amount of contribution, financial and non-financial, you can make in lieu of full membership
  

Thanks for your time,

David Chanter, Andy Gelme, John Spencer, Bob Powers, Luke Weston, Michael Sullivan

CCHS Committee

[Dave Chanter]

Q.) 

50% fee increase. That is some shortfall! Are you going to publish the numbers behind that?

A.) 

The financials are open to you as a member if you would like to view them in full just contact Bob and he will arrange to take you through them down to the dollar, in the meantime here is a simple view of our core problem.

Operational Expenses for CCHS are approximately $20,000 year, that covers rent and utilities with a small margin of error to account for fluctuations.

We have 40 members, 15 full / 25 concession, we stand to earn $13,200 from our membership base. A shortfall of approximately $7000.

Now, these numbers have changed a little since we made this decision as membership grows and the balance between full and concession members shifts. While the outlook becomes more positive as the months go on the rate of change is not enough to bank on.

It is not well known but CCHS survived its initial years on the generous donations of a select few (awesome) individuals who paid its rent while it grew, without those donations we would not be here today to have this discussion.

[April Staines]

Just a question, sorry if this has already been answered.

Are the proposed changes are to the facility fees for members not to the membership fees?  Im just a little confused.

For someone like me who would perhaps come to the space once a month, sometimes once every two months.  How does that work?

My assumption is I pay a yearly membership fee and I would pay each time I visit.  But if I was working on a project I would be at the space more I would pay the monthly fee for the period I am there, lets say two months, and then hypothetically I would go back to paying per visit.

If I wanted 24/7 access, the assumption is your using the facilities on a monthly rate?

thanks

-------------------------------------------------------------------

April Staines - Melbourne AU

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Connected Community HackerSpace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-h...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-commu...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/1eeb1fcb-2806-4817-9a60-9d3dffb33a29%40googlegroups.com?hl=en-GB.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Robert Powers]

Hi April,

 

 Just a question, sorry if this has already been answered.

 

Questions are great; we want this to be as clear as possible!

 Are the proposed changes are to the facility fees for members not to the
 membership fees?  Im just a little confused.

 

There is no proposed change to the $50 financial membership yearly minimum. I think this is what you're asking. Financial membership is required for voting at an AGM/SGM or to petition the committee.

 For someone like me who would perhaps come to the space once a month,
 sometimes once every two months.  How does that work?

Casual memberships are good for 1 public session and will remain at $10. A monthly or greater membership will be required for non-public-session access.

 My assumption is I pay a yearly membership fee and I would pay each time I
 visit.  But if I was working on a project I would be at the space more I
 would pay the monthly fee for the period I am there, lets say two months,
 and then hypothetically I would go back to paying per visit.

A yearly membership fee would be all that is required if you're talking about facility fees, no casual payments or monthly payments required past that. In this case, under the proposed fee structure, it would be $720/year or $360/year concession.

If you're talking about financial membership, that is not a requisite to using the space on a casual or monthly basis, but your casual** or monthly facility fees DO contribute to your $50/year minimum financial membership.

**If you are strictly casual, you'll need to notify the Treasurer or Secretary that you want this accounted before the any AGM or SGM if you intend to vote or in any case you would like to petition the committee.

 If I wanted 24/7 access, the assumption is your using the facilities on a
 monthly rate?

Yes, that is required.

And we'll try to make the ability to transition from a casual membership to monthly or greater as easy as possible. Or vice versa. This should be one of the benefits of our new access system. 

Hope that clears some things up. If not, please let me know and I'll write as much as needs writing!

Thanks,

Bob

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/CAB3zPcWVYF3a_zE7nfanTm3ey5Zdp8rTEdLxj10UTwkDxEv71w%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-GB.

[Geoff]

Hi Committee

I have some questions on the following:

//=====================================================================

Voting against the change will put the future operation of CCHS at risk. Without trying to be dramatic, the committee will be forced to attempt to raise funds in an alternative manner. The focus of those efforts would be to pay the rent and not on improving the space. These circumstances mean any shortfall could result in closure.

//=====================================================================

1. What attempts have been made to raise funds in an alternative manner to help pay the costs: rent, etc? 

2. Given most members are concession [15 full / 25 concession] members, have you considered the barrier the increase presents to current and future members?

3. And that this increase may have a negative impact on membership numbers?

4. While I do understand that given the running cost, rising the fees is a responsible thing for the committee to do; would it also be a reasonable thing for the committee to canvass the group to see if there are people willing to raise funds in an alternative manner? 

Note: I am thinking that those of us with more time than money may be more motivated and may have the time to do this work. 

5. Recognizing the fact that rising the fees is a responsible thing to do and that it may present a barrier for some members, would the committee consider seeking alternative ways to raise funds to subsidize concession membership?  

Regards

Geoff

[Scott Penrose]

Hi Committee

My small bit of feedback is this...

I am a casual visitor. If I visit 10 times per year, then I will be paying $150. $50 membership + $10 per visit. Full membership is $750, which means I would have to visit 70 times to be of value, and really lots more to be effectively a discount and worth the extra up front cost.

So I have a couple of suggestions for you.

1 - I think casual should be more expensive than fully paid member. You would assume that a fully paid member will be coming 48 times a year - once per week except holidays. Therefor I think casual should be closer to $16 maybe even $20 to make it worth while to the full timers. (yes some members come 2 times per week - lucky them, but think on the average member, in most cases even 48 visits is a lot).

2 - Provide a mechanism where we give you money in advance, but is limited to a year. e.g. I would be happy to say that I am coming 10 times @ $20 = $250 total for the year. I give that to you, you have the money in advance, and I can still come casually up to 10 times. If I don't come, I have donated the money to a good cause, and you got it in advance. If I come more than 10 times - I owe you casual. 

Option 1 is important because there should be value for members above casual.

Option 2 is just like buying a bunch of tickets in advance - lower overhead on your part, and more importantly you get the money up front. The yearly limit is just so you don't carry a large liability going forward.

Scott

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Connected Community HackerSpace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-h...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-commu...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/d5d7e7e1-5385-4509-8e8a-a078fffade42%40googlegroups.com?hl=en-GB.

[Dave Chanter]

On Wednesday, 22 May 2013 15:14:28 UTC+10, Geoff wrote:

Hi Committee

Hello,

 

I have some questions on the following:

//=====================================================================

Voting against the change will put the future operation of CCHS at risk. Without trying to be dramatic, the committee will be forced to attempt to raise funds in an alternative manner. The focus of those efforts would be to pay the rent and not on improving the space. These circumstances mean any shortfall could result in closure.

//=====================================================================

1. What attempts have been made to raise funds in an alternative manner to help pay the costs: rent, etc? 

We currently have 1 grant application underway with our eye on another in the near future, but it must be noted that grants are rarely given to cover operating expenses and also that grants have a lead time of several months between success and payment. We are about to announce one new sponsor and we are courting another. We are booked in to host some BBQ events at Masters and Bunnings, but the wait list on those is months or years long. Michael Sullivan has been emailing every business under the sun asking for donations of things we need.

 

2. Given most members are concession [15 full / 25 concession] members, have you considered the barrier the increase presents to current and future members?

3. And that this increase may have a negative impact on membership numbers?

For 2 & 3, yes we did consider the barrier and the possibility of lost members. It was debated at great length and we still came to the same conclusion.

 

4. While I do understand that given the running cost, rising the fees is a responsible thing for the committee to do; would it also be a reasonable thing for the committee to canvass the group to see if there are people willing to raise funds in an alternative manner? 

Note: I am thinking that those of us with more time than money may be more motivated and may have the time to do this work. 

Thanks for understanding, it was not an easy decision. We fully intend to pursue all fundraising possibilities and encourage members to alert us to opportunities. Remember that once expenses are paid we can use excess money to improve the space, should membership balloon sufficiently and sustainably we will investigate

 

5. Recognizing the fact that rising the fees is a responsible thing to do and that it may present a barrier for some members, would the committee consider seeking alternative ways to raise funds to subsidize concession membership?  

Yes we would, but thus far no scheme or plan will come to fruition soon enough to prevent this need unless you have a philanthropist up your sleeve. Additionally sustaining ourselves on the generosity of organisations is not a good long term plan, we should be self sustaining.

 

Regards

Geoff

[Dayle Hemsley]

Move the club to a cheaper area. That’s what they did in Sydney and it worked for them.

 

Dayle

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Connected Community HackerSpace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-h...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-commu...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/9513610f-4aa9-4705-8c6c-3b4c3a0cbc47%40googlegroups.com?hl=en-GB.

[Dave Chanter]

On Wednesday, 22 May 2013 15:52:55 UTC+10, Dayle wrote:

Move the club to a cheaper area. That’s what they did in Sydney and it worked for them.

This is also being looked at.

  

[Dave Chanter]

Hi Scott,

You raise good points which have ignited discussion on the committee, we can't claim to get everything right first time, we'll come to a consensus and get back to everyone here.

Dave

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-hackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-community-hacke...@googlegroups.com.

[Scott Penrose]

Thanks for the feedback Dave, appreciate it. Good luck.

Scott

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-h...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-commu...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/afea815b-5b6c-4143-855f-51d1ab8e708d%40googlegroups.com?hl=en-GB.

[Geoff]

Thank you for your reply. 

If there is some way I may help with rising funds please let me know. I have the time and motivation.

[Paul Szymkowiak]

Great email Dave and fellow Committee members.

I think that in general, the rules of association changes look fair and reasonable and address key problem areas.

Dave said:

> Additionally sustaining ourselves on the generosity of organisations 

> is not a good long term plan, we should be self sustaining.

Agreed. To reiterate/ reinforce that point, the general experience is that community spaces that rely on donations for operating expenses don't sustain in the long term.  This is appears to be a  fairly well-established rule of thumb in both the hacker/ makerspace and coworking communities.

Donations are great for facilities development: equipment purchases, consumables, etc.

I agree with Scott's observations, and that's something that has been discussed previously.  I strongly support the idea of incentivising the benefits of ongoing membership over more casual, adhoc use of the space.

The other key point which doesn't appear to have been covered yet, is membership numbers. The rest of my comments here relate to that topic.

Does the new committee have plans in that regard?  Is there a structured plan to engage with other existing groups to use the space, or to expand the range of sessions to encourage an increased membership base?  I suspect that will be better return on effort expended than chasing grants, especially to address the operating costs shortfall.

As background, when we first discussed whether to take on the Kent Lane lease, and because it exceeded the budget that we had been working with up to that point, it was clear at that time that operating expenses exceeded the current membership's ability to sustain those figures based on the facilities fees that had been proposed.  The rent portion of the operating costs are fixed, but the access to the space is theoretically 24 x 7, notwithstanding security and other concerns.  It was clear that membership had to increase: quickly significantly and rapidly.

It was a core requirement of the then incoming committee to increase the membership to enable the figures as they stood to work.  That logically required the space to be used more often and by a broader range of people.  Kent lane operating at almost 7 days a week, used by a broader variety of makers and hackers with both general as well as special-interest sessions is key to making the current costs work.  The membership fees could possibly be lowered - rather than increased - with significantly more members.  

So, one avenue to explore is to propose that existing members actively canvas their contact networks for addition members and member-partner groups.

Some food for thought: we have previously had discussions with Robogals, ATA EV and Arduino groups, Geekgirls, Cosplay groups, and even Swinburne enquiring about a potential bulk rate to enable students to access the hackerspace.  I can imagine a range of weekly or monthly sub-group or affiliated group meetups could work quite successfully to augment the core CCHS membership.

Paul

Paul Szymkowiak

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Connected Community HackerSpace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-h...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-commu...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/a6054976-aac8-4b36-b1f7-64ee50dde9fe%40googlegroups.com?hl=en-GB.

[damie...@gmail.com]

Some really good points here based on experience with similar maker organisations, and good to see healthy discussion on this list 

Ultimately, it's going to come down to our Committee choosing the best bunch of features.

I'm a little surprised at how few fully paid members we have, but think this number could grow substantially if we offer access on any day during reasonable hours.

I think Paul's raised an important point here about security, and that relates to insurance. This also makes me wonder about other legal requirements, such as council permission for opening hours. Personally, I think we don't create excessive noise or traffic hassles, but the council has their own ideas on guidelines and approval process.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/CA%2B6RZafTYgC%3Dd%2BZxCwPVBnXAYDUmjgK7SeN2J7CBXbj-UtGu-g%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-GB.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
Damie...@gmail.com

[James Denier]

Just got back into Australia and have been waiting to write this! Looks like Paul beat me to it though.

Whilst I can understand and see the obvious short-fall in funding, raising the membership fees that significantly strikes me as a move that would scare away potentially new members.

Darren mentioned in another thread the key to solving (or at least alleviating) the funding issues. Right now there are three sessions a week. Monday evening, Tuesday evening and all day Saturday. Speaking for myself, I'm only able to attend, at max, one of those a week (circumstances allowing (i.e girlfriend)). That means, for me, it currently works out better to be a Casual member than a paid-up monthly member because I'm saving myself money.

If you looked at RAISING casual rates, I suspect people would be LESS inclined to come. I know I've enjoyed every time I have attended and have always received very useful information. However, sometimes it's only an hour's visit and that would be a hard sell for $20 when you aren't so financially secure.

The solution that I see is the 24/7 access. I, for one (and Darren has indicated the same) would definitely become a fully paid up monthly member if I had access to the 'space 24/7. I think it would attract a lot more people to become members as well.

If there is a short-fall of 7k and one full-time member at $40/month brings in approx. $400 a year, then you would need to attract another 15 full-time members. Whilst 24/7 access might not go the whole way to doing that it would go a long way.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/CA%2B6RZafTYgC%3Dd%2BZxCwPVBnXAYDUmjgK7SeN2J7CBXbj-UtGu-g%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-GB.

[Ken Ihara]

+1 to James' email!   Broader access is huge.

At the moment I am at home getting very little work done.  I'm hungry.  It would be wonderful if I could drive down to Hawthorn, have a nice lunch, and then hack away for a few hours at the space...

We have a wonderful work space that is getting zero utilization during working hours. 

Could we take on some aspects of a co-working space during the day?  For example:  http://www.electronworkshop.com.au/

Ken

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/CACYVXstbzmgfnG-jT7LoS97aFh57e9PV4SMKQk%2BFKfxog3xbWg%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-GB.

[Dave Chanter]

Hi All,

First, Thank you to everyone for remaining so constructive, it is the professional and intelligent approach I have come to appreciate in all our members and it makes me very proud to represent you all. Much of the concerns are mirrors of discussions had in committee.

Because it is the hot topic I will call out self service access:

First, Yes, It is happening, no further discussion needs to made in its favour, its a done deal.

We are community of builders and makers who contribute to a shared resource (CCHS). We understand that self service access is a desirable feature that will lead to more people wanting to be members, but it also opens us to abuse and this must be mitigated through policy and a good vetting procedure which is being reviewed and finalised as we speak. In short it is not something that can be turned around instantly and suddenly result in 20 new members, it is a perk of longer term membership in our community and is aimed at providing more value for that community.

I feel it is also important to call out what we are not, we are not a co-working space, incubator or tech workshop, if we were, we would be talking about hourly charges for desks and machinery usage (Feel free to Google the market rates and compare). We are also not a charity, we aim only for sustainable self sufficiency for our membership.

Thanks,

DC

[Robert Powers]

Hello,

And, more sounding off from the committee, there is the point that we're doing this at an SGM to make sure there is community buy-in. The reason will be a vote is that we didn't want to be seen to be acting unilaterally and ultimately if our community doesn't want these changes to it's fee structure, well, that will come out in the wash.

Secondly, and this point is being brought up on all sides, but I'd like to put it in explicit terms - pardon the bold - expanded individual access IS eminent and it represents a considerable increase in value to regular members, it does have increased expenses (luckily, not nearly on the scale of value offered), and more than financial realities, this should be seen as the justification for a fee increase. At least that's very much the way I view it. 

Yes, increased access *might* drive membership numbers up, but we're not able to bank on that. We're aiming to keep the doors open through membership alone and these proposed fees are what makes that happen. If, through advertising, new offers, happenstance or magic, we do manage to explode our numbers and suddenly our facility fee income greatly exceeds our facility expenses, the very first item on the agenda will be reconsidering this increase. It isn't a ratchet as so many other things; we can go back. The committee pays their fees the same as everyone else and we don't like it any more than you. 

Finally, we do appreciate all the feedback. Even if it does sound much like the discussions happening on the committee list and in meetings for the last few months, it is good to know that everyone else is as concerned about the 'space as we are. Keep in mind that we can continue to make changes. If we're see a drastic reaction, such a large migration to casual memberships, we'll adjust - it's an iterative process, and we can revise it as many times as is needed. Yes we want to get it right, and no we don't want to bother everyone every month with a new structure, but this is important, so we'll do whatever we have to to make it work.

Thanks,

Bob

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Connected Community HackerSpace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-h...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-commu...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/f3966597-e39f-4308-aae8-878bb1c6ce8b%40googlegroups.com?hl=en-GB.

[Luke Weston]

"expanded individual access IS eminent"

Well, to be fair, it has been imminent for many, many months; arguably imminent ever since establishing the Kent Lane premises.

Perhaps the members deserve to have a clearer, more quantitatively certain idea of what imminent actually means - people probably aren't going to be happy with paying increased fees if more flexible use of the space at flexible times doesn't start immediately when the increased fees start and is still "imminent" for months down the track.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/CA%2BKRtjg_P9H_rNNeVv3WDqVON084w0_9%3D4nzFs8QdYDr1o%2BemA%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-GB.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the human(s) named above. If intercepted by an extraterrestrial civilization, all opinions expressed in this email are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of mankind as a whole.

[Robert Powers]

Ah, thanks for playing the Advocate once again Luke! In that role, I'm surprised you didn't also pick on the imminent/eminent mistyping, but glad you did correct it.

The simple response is that I'm now on the record as using this as a justification, if several months down the track we find no doors open, well, then there will be a nice argument to rescind the changes, won't it?

Cheers,

Bob

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/CAEPooQFPzDrTzTyWN5yrgib-qcrTZhWa%2BwOSjgYUeo%2BZqnxHdQ%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-GB.

[Keith Franks]

May I suggest a mini-kickstarter type event?

There are hundreds of people on the mailing list and only a very small number of full paying members. 

What if you put out a call for pledges? For example, a six month advance payment of $X allows you to have an after hours access once the door is set up. Get people to pledge the amount before a particular time frame (eg in two weeks time) and then see what the increase in membership would be like.

The number of pledges will reflect the number of new (minimum) monthly members and therefore give you a great indication of what the funding will be like for the next 6 months. Hell, you could even do it every six month to enable some sort of forecasting....

(Obviously there may be attrition and also conditions would need to be instigated for the access thing, but I think serious members understand this)

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Robert Powers <rdpo...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/CA%2BKRtjg_P9H_rNNeVv3WDqVON084w0_9%3D4nzFs8QdYDr1o%2BemA%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-GB.

[Andy Gelme]

hi All,

On 2013-05-23 14:17 , Luke Weston wrote:
> Well, to be fair, it has been imminent for many, many months; arguably
> imminent ever since establishing the Kent Lane premises.

Since the establishment of Kent Lane ... until recently (two months
ago), it was often the case that there were more physical keys in the
hands of members than there were regular facility fee paying members.
Demonstrably, members in good standing who were willing to open the
space for others (announcing those times for the benefit of others) and
be responsible for a good outcome ... were provided with a physical
key. There was no unreasonable limitation placed on when they might
open the space.

People who just wanted access for their own purposes and little interest
in providing access for others ... didn't get much joy. More work
needed to be done before that type of broader access could be properly
supported.

Some other HackerSpaces have just handed out keys to all (few or no
questions asked) with varied results ... and in one known case,
unfortunate results.

There have been many things to put in place beyond just the "door access
project" to ensure a good, long-term, sustainable result. Focusing
solely on the mechanism for opening a door ... and believing that's all
that is required to operate a fully functional HackerSpace is too narrow.

Over a long period of time, the NFC door access has been worked on ...
and it was originally run as a learning exercise in having members run
their own group project. However, we haven't been in the situation of
promising on a regular basis to the general CCHS email list that "it is
imminent" ... and then repeatedly saying "hang on, a few more weeks".

Open access has not been regular announced as "imminent for many, many
months", because that wasn't the case and false claims have not been made.

The announcement of the SGM, the potential fee increase (to be voted on)
and the availability of open access (based on the door access project)
has only just occurred.

Given that the door access is functioning and under-going broader
testing now ... means there is substance to that claim.

> Perhaps the members deserve to have a clearer, more quantitatively
> certain idea of what imminent actually means - people probably aren't
> going to be happy with paying increased fees if more flexible use of
> the space at flexible times doesn't start immediately when the
> increased fees start and is still "imminent" for months down the track.

Yes, sounds like a action for a committee member.

--
-O- cheers = /\ /\/ /) `/ =
--O -- http://www.geekscape.org --
OOO -- an...@geekscape.org -- http://twitter.com/geekscape --

[Dave Chanter]

On Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:40:26 UTC+10, Keith Franks wrote:

May I suggest a mini-kickstarter type event?

This would fall under charity and not make us self sufficient, it is a business risk. As a fundamental rule of business, operating expenses must be met with operating cash flow.

[Stuart Young]

I've been busy (just got back from Canberra for work and heading back there very early on Tuesday morning) so I've not had a chance to put in my 5c on this conversation.

Something that some members may not realise is that CCHS is one of the cheapest hackerspace in Australia to join regarding facility fees. Please keep this in mind when you vote.

Perth's Artifactory "Associate Membership", which only entitles you to access on theme nights or any time with another member present is $50 a month for the full rate, and you don't get a key. For full key 24 hr access they charge $100 a month. This is substantially more than what the CCHS Committee has suggested.

HSBNE (Brisbane) is $60 a month (full rate). MHV (Canberra) is $60 a month (full rate). They are both at the same price point as CCHS is suggesting.

Robots & Dinosaurs (Sydney) is about the only one currently that has the same costs as we pay, and it would not surprise me if they decide to raise them soon.

In regards to cheaper locations:

I know that the Ctte are chasing a few contacts regarding cheaper locations (eg: via councils). However it should be noted that, apart from a few initial places that CCHS looked at (and were immediately snapped up before anyone even agreed to have a better look), Kent Lane is relatively cheap rent for the size of the venue. It is also somewhat central and moving in any direction majorly (in enough of a way that the rent would substantially drop if we're paying it ourselves) would disadvantage existing members most likely leading to attrition.

It also needs to be noted that while rent is our major outgoing at the moment, it's definitely not our only outgoing. Even should we get a helping hand with a new location, through the council or via another group, such things often still involve some sort of rent. Depending on the size of the venue, that rent may not be much cheaper at all, and such costs may be absorbed by increased costs in other utilities (eg: more use of electricity for heating the venue, etc).

Also, even if a venue popped up tomorrow, it would take months to organise a move and get the new place set up, plus further once off costs for connecting utilities, fittings and the like at the new location, While still paying out the existing lease (till December). All in all this is money CCHS currently doesn't have, so it's not worth speculating about it.

In regards to 24 hr access:

Having full 24 hr access will mean we'll most likely have to amend our current insurance policy and have a proper security system (such as cameras with a recording system, etc) in place. As HSBNE unfortunately learned when they were burgled, having 24 hr access meant that they were not actually covered against theft, and they were unable to make a claim to replace the stolen items. I also worry about what will happen if we get complaints about noise past midnight, which would strain/ruin the currently good relationship that CCHS has with the local council. That said, I've recently donated 3 more CCTV cameras to the space (in addition to the 1 I donated many months ago, bringing the total to 4) so that they can be used as part of a security system. We still don't have a box to connect them to though, so things would still need to be organised on that front.

So while I'm in favour of flexible access times, I am not in favour of 24 hr access as I think it may put more liabilities on the space that will, in turn, cost us more.

--
Stuart Young (aka Cefiar)

[Luke Weston]

Thanks for the good post Stuart, lots of important and useful information to consider here.

However, I don't believe anybody is saying that members must be able to use the space 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

But there is a huge gulf of difference in between what we currently have (approximately 12 hours per week, at narrow fixed times) and 24x7.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Connected Community HackerSpace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-h...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-commu...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/CAPh9M%2BGGBsm4AGakM3aW%3DFs7T73vv6ggCKJ8KJhKfB%2BTSpExQA%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-GB.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--

[Stuart Young]

I quite agree with what you say Luke, regarding "But there is a huge gulf of difference in between what we currently have (approximately 12 hours per week, at narrow fixed times) and 24x7.", but if there is no upper limit set, even if only as a guideline, then I think this will lead to problems when someone eventually exploits it constantly and issues arise.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/CAEPooQF%2Bpo3My9FSkkp7MLSAAoECELkn-UwZBeJUrQ24h4Ps8w%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-GB.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
Stuart Young (aka Cefiar)

[Dave Chanter]

Hi All,

Can we please keep this thread focused on the SGM Agenda so it can be a relevant Q&A location people.'

If you would like to look at the, in progress, key agreement feel free to send me a private message I'll share it to you via GoogleDocs.

DC

[Dave Chanter]

I mean "relevant Q&A location for people."

[Geoff]

Paul

I have some trouble with your following statement:

>Dave said:

>> Additionally sustaining ourselves on the generosity of organisations 

>> is not a good long term plan, we should be self sustaining.

>Agreed. To reiterate/ reinforce that point, the general experience is that community >spaces that rely on donations for operating expenses don't sustain in the long term.  >This is appears to be a  fairly well-established rule of thumb in both the hacker/ >makerspace and coworking communities. 

Clearly you are expressing more than an opinion, you are seeking to make make a strong point and a statement of fact.

The trouble with your statement is that is that it is in fact, opinion written as a statement of fact. There are no facts that support your statement nor have you established any foundation on which you base such strong statements [Please note that I would welcome any facts that establish a strong foundation for your statements].   

Such statements do not promote the questioning of what may be a misleading statement.

Conversely, Stuart's excellent post is a good example of making a good point "CCHS is one of the cheapest hackerspace in Australia", which is well supported by a list of detailed facts. It is this kind of post [Cefiar - May 23] that promotes informed debate. 

Regards

Geoff

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-hackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-community-hacke...@googlegroups.com.

[Andy Gelme]

hi Geoff,

Paul wrote:

>Agreed. To reiterate/ reinforce that point, the general experience is that community >spaces that rely on donations for operating expenses don't sustain in the long term.  >This is appears to be a  fairly well-established rule of thumb in both the hacker/ >makerspace and coworking communities.

On 2013-05-24 09:47 , Geoff wrote:

Clearly you are expressing more than an opinion, you are seeking to make make a strong point and a statement of fact.

The trouble with your statement is that is that it is in fact, opinion written as a statement of fact. There are no facts that support your statement nor have you established any foundation on which you base such strong statements [Please note that I would welcome any facts that establish a strong foundation for your statements].

 

I can confirm that Paul is correct in his statements quoted above.  It is the *opinion* of many HackerSpace organizers ... based on their practical experiences over a long time.  Paul is being factually in his claim "fairly well-established rule of thumb".

There is a good set of HackerSpace Design Patterns here (worth skimming) ...
   http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Design_Patterns

Two that are relevant to this discussion ...
   http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/The_Sponsoring_Anti-Pattern
   http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/The_Membership_Fees_Pattern

There are many other documents and videos about HackerSpaces that also reiterate these sentiments.

It is a strongly desirable position to be in ... where your space does not depend on external factors outside of the control of the membership.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Whilst the CCHS email list is not Wikipedia, perhaps two things would help in general ...

* When making a debatable statement, perhaps provide a URL that backs you up.  Especially, in cases where you are outside of your known area of expertise.

   Note: Paul does know what he talking about when it comes to community building.

* When claiming someone is wrong, do a Google search (or similar) first.  People sometimes add this caveat "As far as I'm aware" ... which often means "Not aware enough".

This happens a lot (everywhere in life) ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning_Kruger ... even smart people who are experts in one area making authoritative sounding statements in other areas are prone to this effect.

[Holger]

Hi Friends

Let me put in my two cents here. First of all, I think CCHS is awesome,
and we can't allow it to go down the drain. As both Barbara and I really
like it, I would however suggest to contemplate the idea of a 'family'
rate.

At the moment I am a normal member, paying $40 a month. Often, my son
Toby is coming as well, but not really using the facilities.
Occasionally, Barbara will come along as well, and has had her own
project (though she has fallen behind a bit).

Since I don't have time on Tuesdays, I usually only come to Printer
Mondays and Saturdays. Even then, I often don't do much more than chat
around and marvel at the great stuff everyone else makes.

I am happy to pay more for that, but if we both would get forced onto
the $60 a month bracket (meaning that our contribution would triple), I
think the most likely result is for both of us to revert back to casual
visitors, and if every time I would think: Is my attendance today worth
$10, I would also probably more often come back with a negative.

Maybe I stay a full member, and Barbara will pay casual, that's an idea.

But my suggestion is to offer a family membership fee.

Cheers,
Holger

[Holger]

On 21/05/13 22:49, Dave Chanter wrote:

> Special General Meeting
>
> Date: 18th June 2013
> Time: 7:00pm to 8:00pm
> Location: CCHS - 5 Kent Lane
> Who: All CCHS financial members

> It is our hope that you will attend this meeting
> and lend your voice to ensure that our great
> HackerSpace can continue to grow and improve. If
> you have concerns please voice them; the committee
> are happy to hear and discuss with you before
> the SGM.

One more thing: I can't make it, is there a way to cast an absentee
ballot and/or give my vote to someone else to cast in my name?

Thanks

Holger

[Scott Penrose]

On 24/05/2013, at 12:34 PM, Holger wrote:

One more thing: I can't make it, is there a way to cast an absentee
ballot and/or give my vote to someone else to cast in my name?

Standard part of an assoctation is a proxy vote - but only at an AGM, and only on a particular raised point. ie. You can't pass your vote to someone else to use, you can just say "My vote would be YES or NO". Since AGM and Special meetings are rare it is often not necessary to vote in this way, and just expressing your opinion is enough. KISS.

Scott

[Dave Chanter]

Hi Holger,

I believe that proxy votes work the same in a SGM as they do in an AGM, I will confirm for you.

We have been discussing a family rate also but have reached no decision, As one of our few families full of hackers I would love to hear your thoughts on what you would like a family fee to look like. Email us at: connected-comm...@googlegroups.com, you may also post here if you wish to foster some public discussion.

For what it is worth, My partner pays for a casual rate as she only visits twice a month. 

Cheers,

DC

[Paul Szymkowiak]

Hi Geoff/ Andy,

Andy covered much of what I would have offered in reply (thanks Andy!), but there are probably a few additional comments that might help Geoff and possibly others that I'll add.

> Clearly you are expressing more than an opinion

Yes.  I'm conveying my personal experience and understanding based on the conversations that I have had with - and experience reports I have read that were written by - people globally, about community and collaborative space building.  Obviously, my understanding is limited by the experiences and information I have had access to, so yes, it's certainly fallible.  But I think that even allowing for sampling bias and other sources of error, there is enough data to identify rules of thumb.

Geoff, you quite rightly state that I'm conveying my opinion (based on my experience and understanding).  But I'm concerned that your objections may serve to spin the discussion in a way that isn't helpful, and isn't supported by what appears to be the predominant experience of the community at large.

> you are seeking to make make a strong point and a statement of fact.

When I say "a fairly well-established rule of thumb", it should be apparent I'm not claiming an immutable law ;)  A rule of thumb is fallible: there will be cases where it's not appropriate or relevant.  I wouldn't use "statement of fact" in this discussion - nor many discussions for that matter.  I'm more of a pragmatic, context-driven thinker.

If you want me to put my claims in context, I am happy to state that in my various discussions over a number of years, backed by a reasonable amount of online reading and research on a topic I care about, I have found very few success stories about community spaces covering their operating costs from predominantly external (non member) funds on an ongoing basis.  The links Andy provided go some way to supporting the common position(s).

As Andy indicated, doing your own research you are likely to find that most successful spaces operate on membership fees, charged facilities, services, events, etc.  The space and its members generate income directly.  Of course, the landscape keeps changing, and there are more and more spaces operating, so I expect the norm may change over time.

I think there is a lot of value in looking at what others have done and have attempted to do, and their relative success.  I don't think that has to dictate the exact approach and decisions that others might follow, but I think that failing to consider or ignoring that experience is at worst, unhelpful. 

> There are no facts that support your statement nor have you established 

> any foundation on which you base such strong statements

> [Please note that I would welcome any facts that establish a strong 

> foundation for your statements].   

My apologies. It was an oversight on my part to not consider that those currently on the list may not have the background of the previous conversations and discussions (both on and off list), nor the global community interaction.

Other than the general guidance I can offer you to do your own research and review the existing web experience reports, one specific point might be worth sharing: 

I met Jonathan Robinson, co-founder of The Hub (http://members.the-hub.net/profiles/j.robinson), during the initial discussions around setting up Hub Melbourne.  Hub is now operating in 30 cities on all 5 continents, and is expected to grow to 100 sites over a 5 year period.  One of the key things Jonathan shared was that in every case where a hub was established to be operated solely or significantly off grants and external donations, it had failed.  Jonathan went on to discuss various aspects of those failures.  The impression he gave was that funding hubs via government grants and other external assistance is a fairly common consideration, and it was clear to me that his firm starting position was "don't do it".

Considering that input, and analysing the reasoning behind this seemingly common sentiment across a wide range of situations, it seems to me its a fairly logical and obvious point.

But you are strictly correct: this is my opinion, based on my own experience and fallible research.  

Paul

Paul Szymkowiak

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to connected-community-h...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to connected-commu...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/connected-community-hackerspace/e55fc453-f46c-4d31-ae5d-04e0d2573b16%40googlegroups.com?hl=en-GB.

[Geoff]

Hi Paul and Andy

Thank you both for your posts, I apologize for not limiting my criticism to a 'lack of references'.  

When I wrote the post I did not see it being taken in the way it has been. For clarity my intention is to strongly emphasise the value of providing references.

Not being an expert nor clearly having the "common knowledge" I was not able to put your previous post in it's intended context. While now the context is obvious, then it appeared to me quite differently. 

Without a framework or context it is difficult to know where to start to research this matter. Any such investigation I believe would be more presumption than understanding, but now the context is known, some where to start is obvious. 

Paul, I believe the context you have provided added considerable weight to your post.  

Andy, thank you for all the references. The references on "Design Patterns" has sparked some interest outside of this group and so did the "Dunning–Kruger effect" reference (I was happy to see that it was well referenced;-)

Regards

Geoff