m (→What happens if we have legal trouble?)
|(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)|
|Line 17:||Line 17:|
Revision as of 14:23, 25 July 2013
Reporting at the weekly meeting
I re-worded the weekly meeting paragraph. I got the impression that Rachel's comments were trying to point out that we might want more definition there, not an actual objection to the idea of weekly reporting.
I feel very strongly that the Noisebridge Tor project should *make available* a report _every_ week. Ad infinitum, as long as this project is going. In theory (and I think the wording allows for this) you guys could create a google spreadsheet, share it with me, and as long as it's up to date every tuesday I always have your report.
To me the only thing that made it sound like the bookkeeper had to be at the meeting every week was the bit about answering questions so I added a sentence saying that the bookkeeper should make a good faith effort to be present to answer questions when there's a lot going on, like now and at some point when we transition to the new accounting system.
I also clarified at the end that the Bookkeeper may use me or another member of the project as proxy. I did this partly because if I feel we need more actual input from the project members, I would probably suggest that someone else be proxy because I won't know the ins and outs of the project.
--Hurtstotouchfire 18:52, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
What happens if we have legal trouble?
Specifically, what happens financially? I think that we may want to put a caveat in here somewhere that if the Noisebridge Tor project has any cause to spend large amounts of money on legal matters, that Noisebridge does not pay for this, and that the project is paused until such expenditures can be reasonably covered. I just don't want to get to the point, for any reason, where we have to use the consensus process to pause the project. I would like to assume good faith that the project coordinators would do that. Maybe we can get some commitment along those lines? But it is not unfathomable to me that they might want to take a stand, and frankly I would support that--but I would want to pause and sort out the finances for doing so at least briefly.
I think I will add to the "loan from general fund" clause that this loan is for routine monthly operating expenses and that anything out of the ordinary would require... discussion. I hesitate to say that it will require consensus but I suppose it probably would.
First I'll point out that the question "what happens if we have legal trouble?" applies to *everything* Noisebridge has and does -- the shop, the kitchen, the fridges, the laser cutter, the open wifi, and many other projects. So I am hesitant to discuss it for any one project in particular; we certainly can't pretend that the Noisebridge Tor project is somehow unique in requiring consideration of this issue.
We plan to not spend any money on legal expenses, and no other Tor project I'm aware of has incurred Tor-specific legal expenses (excluding incorporation fees and the like). If legal expenses need to be incurred, we'd first look for pro bono legal help (from EFF or whoever else); then establish a legal defense fund and solicit donations; then, perhaps, spend funds out of the Noisebridge Tor budget depending on the details of the situation. If Noisebridge wanted to contribute out of the general fund -- and was in financial shape to do so -- I might be OK with that, but I'd probably prefer to avoid that situation.
- Adi 21:06, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Old items from this page, leftover from previous edits:
Old Open Questions
A list of previously open questions that appeared on this page are listed below.
(We believe these questions are now closed, but would like to confirm with each author before removing them from this page.)
- Kelly would like the Noisebridge Tor project to designate a specific individual as financial officer for the Noisebridge Tor project, to be responsible for the bank account and provide periodic reports. Shannon has volunteered to fulfill this role.
- Kelly would like a summary of why the above scenario is the best, comparing and contrasting other scenarios:
- a Noisebridge Paypal account not connected to any bank account
- a Noisebridge Paypal account connected to a non-Noisebridge bank account
- a non-Noisebridge Paypal account (connected to a bank account or not)
- WePay account with bank account
- WePay account with no bank account
- bank account with bank other than Wells Fargo
- Rachel Lyra is concerned about thinking through the precedent this sets for a fiscal sponsorship model for noisebridge. She believes some documentation is necessary for this project to proceed:
- spell out what the noisetor project expects from noisebridge and what it intends to do in return.
- a document, conceptually a contract but needn't be in legalese. the parties to the contract are noisebridge and the sponsored entity. the entity meets, forms, functions however it likes. noisebridge makes an agreement with that entity or a representative of it. this agreement states what the relationship will entail, ie rights requirements and responsibilities on either side.