Re: [sudo-discuss] The Omni is happening

notes in-line below: It is not just Utopia that may come by, there are other available, viable spaces on the table in different locations. In most ways I see The Omni as the Utopic option. For instance see mock-ups of 8th and Alice with a slice of some of these collectives posited: https://sudoroom.org/wiki/8th_and_Alice it's actually a pretty realistic fallback option to The Omni (say if the deal went sour for whatever reason) at the very least. I don't see 8th and Alice as Utopic, but it is actually closer to a bart station (2 blocks to Lake Merritt station). More importantly, this isn't an all-or-nothing situation. The Omni Collective should be prepared to exist some place other than The Omni if need be, it's fine if The Omni is the priority and primary focus. When we see a proposal to sign a lease at The Omni, we should have one or two naive options alongside, if even just for our bearings. That's not the only way to see this issue. Will Sudoers come to The Omni? Will they come when it's no longer on their way to/from work? Will they come if it's an extra few miles bike ride? Will some of our current paying members be less inclined to contribute regular dues if dropping in means heading much further from their neighborhood? Will hackers from other local spaces, long-distance visitors, guests attending events, and the general public from throughout the bay area make the trip over to sudo room if they have to consider taking an extra total ~24 minutes of travel time (NB > OMNI http://goo.gl/maps/iBsBg vs NB > SR http://goo.gl/maps/WV4ks)? The lesson is both hackerspace-movement-oriented and a local lesson from Noisebridge--being close to 16th St station encourages lots of traffic, which I think is more beneficial than the opposite. I don't think this suggestion is overblown, I think we have to accept it, and accept that 5 blocks does matter, even if it may be worth it ultimately to overcome that hurdle for other benefits. The reality here is that moving to The Omni, moving to any new space, will change the patterns of attendance and usage of sudo room. Whether we like it or not, for better or for worse. The idea of "forking" sudo room to keep presences in multiple areas has even been discussed. I think this is a more practical approach than assuming it will simply work out. I'm more interested in the following question. There have been lots of proposals and gestures on the table. Webs of trust are great, but they aren't perfect. Indeed, it needs to be explicitly laid out and available to all members of all Omni collectives in order for genuine analysis to be feasible. The Delegates make a built-in email/phone-tree btw. Of course, appreciated work, that you yourself once said would be worth it regardless of The Omni itself. It's nice to hear these things, but ambiguity can be eliminated if the numbers and plan are simply written down and handed out. Nothing is expected of you or any Omni Collective delegates other than what you want to put in, and anything you are unwilling or unable to do should be announced back to the sub-collectives. I do not like even the idea of participating in a loan, especially from friends (despite benefits over sycophants like banks). I would personally be inclined to compromise on taking one, but only knowing precise terms. Instead, if we started collecting regular rent dues for April and May, we would simply have the deposit down without the loans. Plus we would have the commitment of member-collectives. This isn't what I mean. Yes, some of the terms are up for negotiation, but what about a contract with the rest of the landlord's terms for our reference and to have time to get clarity? If the existing collectives actually are going to contribute at the rate they've suggested and if they actually pay. Knowing collectives, let's just be honest, a member group of The Omni Collective may simply back out--sudo room included--it happens. I'd like to know what lurches are possible to be left by everyone and whether those constitute risks that are worth taking. On the other hand, recruiting alternative collectives may become a bigger priority if we realize that say more than 1 of the Omni Collective member groups won't be making rent. If we agree to this. Patrik's comment above is crucial in terms of contextualizing this rate and the rates for other member collectives. That amount is how much sudo room gestures it can make as-is. Have the other collectives weight in on this? Can we get a better rate for greater than 2 years? Does any collective have a reason why a 2-year timeline is not feasible for them? Any chance of making an ask to get it rent-free for a 3 month summer move-out and simultaneous build-out? (basically we'd just be coming in to their home for 3 months preparing as they moved, right?) This is precisely what needs to be outlined for everyone to even consider moving in. I'm very uneasy about vagueness here. One of sudo room's minimum requirements is relevant https://sudoroom.org/wiki/Spaces#Precise_Constraints "Security and privacy e.g. not a hallway or shared access with other tenants we don't know." If sudo room is sharing the bocce ball court with CCL, we have to either consider how we share space, or consider build-out to meet this minimum requirement. Maybe we can be embedded like /tmp/lab/ and La Paillasse, or maybe not. We need time to at least talk and decide before agreeing to move. I don't think that's very extreme. It doesn't have to be perfect, just a baseline. I can't stress enough how much I disagree with this point. We can't build consensus by saying it's so. It's not bike-shedding to know precisely what you have access to in exchange for payment, and relative to your partners. Patrik's message in this regard is a good first step, but this is essential and unresolved, high priority IMHO. This is the only space mentioned of concern, the rest make sense. The cafe is actually private space, unless we have an agreement that it is treated especially different since it should be treated as common space for various reasons. Either way, it's important we know this going in. *What is the protocol for conflicts and concerns between (or across I know the details are under-developed, and they will only improve with time as all things. However, does The Omni Collective think it can come to resolution on this by June 1st or is this something that should be turned into an ask for help from the sub-collective memberships? I think this needs to be more direct, e.g.: There are private spaces (defined by map) that only the members of the respective collectives are entitled to access, under the terms relevant for their community. For common spaces, either a process exists for reserving and using the space as private space (up to the reservation's terms), or all members of the Omni Collective have access. As for "prospective members" or the general public, essentially at this point there is no entitlement to common space nor to any private space. Perhaps there are spaces designation for building maintenance / storage needs, access based on discretion and need. This has been discussed obviously. We will start this forthwith. I'd much rather see an ask to put in a membership deposit by June 1 than move-in given the wild hairs. Unless there's a reason to believe these things will come in line to allow for a consensus process to conclude before May 1.