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