[sudo-discuss] Gittip spinoff seeks advice on democratic governance & bylaws for web applications

Tue Jul 29 08:30:15 PDT 2014

How much governance does a site like this really need? Just keep the
servers up and the paperwork current, right?

On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Jenny Ryan <tunabananas at gmail.com> wrote:

> Really good points - and from what I gather of this alt-gittip project,
> they're looking at a structure that involves a few dedicated folks
> spearheading the day-to-day management of the system, but wanting to make
> it as democratic as possible. Let's keep in mind that this is not a
> volunteer-for-fun sort of project, but actually an income ecosystem. As
> such, users of the system would best be served by having the option to have
> a voice in how decisions that would influence their livelihoods are made.
> Transparent documentation of decisions made and challenges articulated is
> important in this regard. Seems like they're hard at work on that :)
>
> Jenny
> http://jennyryan.net
> http://thepyre.org
> http://thevirtualcampfire.org
> http://technomadic.tumblr.com
>
> `~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
>  "Technology is the campfire around which we tell our stories."
> -Laurie Anderson
>
> "Storytelling reveals meaning without committing the error of defining it."
>  -Hannah Arendt
>
> "To define is to kill. To suggest is to create."
> -Stéphane Mallarmé
> ~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Sonja Trauss <sonja.trauss at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I do think there are people who want to participate but can't, but a
>> couple of years ago I realized some people really just don't want to
>> participate in management. They don't think it's fun or worthwhile, the way
>> I really don't want to play video games ... Or I really don't want to cook
>>
>> When I lived in Philadelphia I ran a medium sized brigade for our New
>> Year's Day parade. This is a big once a year project - it involves
>> fundraising, and making a float and about 45 costumes. I assumed everyone
>> who participated was going to be like me, I assumed they would all have
>> strong opinions about their costumes and the theme and the dance and want
>> to have a lot of control and say in the process, so I made the process
>> really open and mainly saw myself as someone who made sure logistics were
>> taken care of so everybody could be free to express themselves. I was right
>> for a lot of people - we definitely have people with strong opinions who
>> made their own decisions.
>>
>> I was super surprised, however, to discover there were also people who
>> did not want to decide on their costume. They wanted me to assign them a
>> costume. They wanted to help, but they wanted me to decide what job they
>> should be doing. They didn't want to hear all of the options, they wanted
>> to come to the space after work, and have me just give them a task, without
>> tiring out their brains with an explanation of the mechanics of the rest of
>> the project. They felt aggravated and stressed by the extra information and
>> required decision making. My friend Ben said, "not everybody's LIKE you,
>> stop being a chauvinist."
>>
>> My mind was blown and I felt like a jerk, lol. but once I knew that I
>> stopped boring those people with extra stress and just gave them
>> assignments.
>>
>> So, the point is, I look out for people who want to participate but arent
>> sure they should, but I also have to trust people sometimes when they say,
>> "I'm sure whatever you decide is fine." Some people really just think
>> politics is boring and don't want to do it.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, July 28, 2014, Jenny Ryan <tunabananas at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Knowing _why_ people weren't invested in the project would be the
>>> natural first step, I think. Whether it were personal life circumstances
>>> or, say, being completely ignored upon first speaking up in the community
>>> on controversial grounds.
>>>
>>> Jenny
>>> http://jennyryan.net
>>> http://thepyre.org
>>> http://thevirtualcampfire.org
>>> http://technomadic.tumblr.com
>>>
>>> `~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
>>>  "Technology is the campfire around which we tell our stories."
>>> -Laurie Anderson
>>>
>>> "Storytelling reveals meaning without committing the error of defining
>>> it."
>>>  -Hannah Arendt
>>>
>>> "To define is to kill. To suggest is to create."
>>> -Stéphane Mallarmé
>>> ~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Sonja Trauss <sonja.trauss at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ok - so you're talking about people who are in fact invested in the
>>>> project, but are not invested in the idea of regularly helping manage the
>>>> project.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sunday, July 27, 2014, Rabbit <rabbitface at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> About this "not very invested" thing, I mean:
>>>>>
>>>>> -- In large democratic organizations, participation can be low even
>>>>> though decisions affect all the participants.  This happened in the
>>>>> Berkeley Student Coops, for example.  How can everyone be encouraged to
>>>>> participate and be informed when that takes time and effort and wading
>>>>> through lots of boring stuff?  And problems can happen when suddenly the
>>>>> other 90% of people show up to vote during a controversy but they're
>>>>> under-informed, but of course we want their voices too.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- If democratic participation requires a large investment of time
>>>>> (going to all the meetings, reading every email), this disadvantages people
>>>>> who don't have the privilege to spend all that time because of childcare,
>>>>> jobs, etc.  How can they become informed and listened to?  The Gittip
>>>>> spinoff is trying to focus on marginalized people and this issue has been
>>>>> mentioned a few times already.
>>>>>
>>>>> I expect that, like with a credit union, the vast majority of users of
>>>>> a website like Gittip will just expect it to be well-run by other people
>>>>> and won't put any effort into participating.  We want to make sure that
>>>>> there are obvious on-ramps to participation and that participation is
>>>>> possible for busy people.
>>>>>
>>>>> More practically, the question is what legal and governance structures
>>>>> meet these goals?  Who gets votes, how are they counted, etc.  Should
>>>>> people who are receiving more donations through the site get more votes
>>>>> because they might be depending on that income?  Can people create 50
>>>>> accounts to get more votes?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm only slightly involved in this project; just signal boosting for
>>>>> them.  If you have ideas or resources or want to get involved, share them
>>>>> with the people on IRC at freenode.#atunit
>>>>>
>>>>> -Rabbit
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Sonja Trauss <sonja.trauss at gmail.com
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi that's fine!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What you're describing isn't what I would have thought "not very
>>>>>> invested in the project" describes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> An example of what you're describing sounds like someone who is in
>>>>>> fact "invested" in the project - uses it, has ideas about it, is affected
>>>>>> by various possible configurations, HOWEVER, is dissuaded from giving
>>>>>> input.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is that right rabbit?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> from my examples before you can tell I was thinking "not very
>>>>>> invested" meant that the person wasn't affected by decisions about
>>>>>> configuration, hadn't spent (invested) time on the project, doesn't have
>>>>>> ideas about the project (didn't invest time in thinking about it), and
>>>>>> doesn't have any financial investment in the project or its outcome.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now part of the reason I asked is that in some systems, say, a
>>>>>> neighborhood, you might have a class if users each of whom are only in the
>>>>>> geographical area for a short time - transients. I think you could say that
>>>>>> any one transient is "uninvested" in the neighborhood, however, a
>>>>>> neighborhood can be more or less comfortable for transients, so if one is
>>>>>> interested in protecting the interests of that class, she would have to get
>>>>>> information (and self advocacy) out of a population made of individuals
>>>>>> - each of whom does not consider herself "invested" in the particular
>>>>>> neighborhood. ("What do I care, I'm leaving soon.")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was wondering if there is some analogous group for something like
>>>>>> gittip or task rabbit, looking for a description of that dynamic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sunday, July 27, 2014, Jenny Ryan <tunabananas at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for responding, Sonja, and sincere apologies for the targeted
>>>>>>> inquiry on my part for the sake of proving the point. That is, all forms of
>>>>>>> participation comprise the social dynamics of any given system.
>>>>>>> Understanding all of these forms of participation (or lack thereof) reveals
>>>>>>> inbalances, power structures, and opportunities to iterate on the current
>>>>>>> model.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think what Rabbit is speaking to boils down to the problem sudo
>>>>>>> room is tackling in its own offbeat experimental way, which is, how do we
>>>>>>> develop a culture that encourages especially the disempowered to feel they
>>>>>>> can be equal participants in and take ownership of the community? To not
>>>>>>> strive for individual profit and power over, but rather, to endeavor toward
>>>>>>> mutual aid and self-motivated responsibility? It is a very hard problem,
>>>>>>> because most of us have grown up embedded in a culture of hierarchy and
>>>>>>> oppression.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We need to develop better models, and open source software
>>>>>>> communities are a fascinating grounds of experimentation and exploration in
>>>>>>> that regard. Really excited about this project. Thanks Rabbit!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Sonja Trauss <
>>>>>>> sonja.trauss at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I participate in the part of the community called "the mailing
>>>>>>>> list."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I never comment on the threads about sudo room mechanics - I chat
>>>>>>>> on threads about general interest topics - porn, gentrification, now this
>>>>>>>> mysterious line in the gittip email.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think the analogy is sound. What rabbit was talking about
>>>>>>>> was "what if the users of task rabbit owned it," yes, sounds good.
>>>>>>>> Now I know there are lots of people who have signed up for task
>>>>>>>> rabbit, but never got around to using it. They have a log in, they forget
>>>>>>>> what it is. Those people sound "not very invested in the project." My
>>>>>>>> question is, why would you need their input? They never log onto your site.
>>>>>>>> Or take a less extreme case. Someone who uses the site, even regularly, but
>>>>>>>> is "not very invested in the project." This person doesn't actually care
>>>>>>>> what happens to the site, they has some other site they also
>>>>>>>> uses, or they is about to move away so they doesn't care... Why do you need
>>>>>>>> this person's input?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sunday, July 27, 2014, Jenny Ryan <tunabananas at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I might ask the same of you, Sonja, wrt why sudo's mailing list
>>>>>>>>> would need input from people who don't really participate in our community?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Sonja Trauss <
>>>>>>>>> sonja.trauss at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why would you need input from people who aren't very invested in
>>>>>>>>>> the project?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, July 25, 2014, Rabbit <rabbitface at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hey all!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Recently there was a controversy at Gittip which resulted in a
>>>>>>>>>>> project to fork or rebuilding it with better governance structures and more
>>>>>>>>>>> focus on the needs and safety of marginalized users.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They are figuring out how to run a web application in a
>>>>>>>>>>> cooperative democratic way that focuses on the needs of the users, as
>>>>>>>>>>> opposed to a TaskRabbit like model where a central corporation controls or
>>>>>>>>>>> extracts value from their users and makes unilateral decisions.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They're working on bylaws and legal structures for this, and
>>>>>>>>>>> would appreciate advice or connections to people with advice.  Talk to them
>>>>>>>>>>> in IRC at #atunit, particularly @adrienneleigh, or send me resources to
>>>>>>>>>>> pass along.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is an exciting frontier for the cooperative movement.  What
>>>>>>>>>>> if TaskRabbit was owned by the rabbits?  Websites have very concentrated
>>>>>>>>>>> power structures compared to the number of users; what are effective ways
>>>>>>>>>>> to get input from so many people who might not all be very invested in the
>>>>>>>>>>> project?  What other models can we draw from -- credit unions?  What
>>>>>>>>>>> lessons can be learned from Wikipedia?  Etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This especially matters for this particular use case, recurring
>>>>>>>>>>> donations, because some people will be making their living off of proceeds
>>>>>>>>>>> from the site and it's important that their voice is heard.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sudoroom may be one of the largest users of this site when it
>>>>>>>>>>> launches, like we are now with Gittip.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -Rabbit
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>>> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20140729/0270eac1/attachment.html>