[sudo-discuss] The Omni is happening - PLEASE REVIEW & DISCUSS!

Tue Apr 15 15:24:40 PDT 2014

thanks everyone for helping make all of this clear for those of us who are
less-able to be involved day-to-day.

does the $1.20/sqft price work out for what every other group has pledged
and the space they're expecting?

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Matthew Senate <mattsenate at gmail.com>wrote:

> Patrik,
>
> Thanks for cross-posting and beginning this discussion between our spaces.
>
> It's also possible for us not to have walls for some time, especially
> given the size of the bocce ball court, construction scheduling of whatever
> space, any number of reasons, etc. One pattern I know of is that (though
> they are now moving into a large space) the biohackerspace La Paillasse
> actually was previously a contiguous open-air area embedded inside
> /tmp/lab/ as i've sketched in the attached images:
>
>
>
>
> edited with
> http://svg-edit.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/editor/svg-editor.html
>
> They were able to conduct some experiments and hack in the same space,
> though of course this can be limiting for some of the reasons you point out
> (e.g. dust). The same goes for the LA Biohackerspace that was inside of
> Null Space http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Null_Space_Labs as well as the
> biohacking contingent of ATX Hackerspace in Austin
> http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/ATX_Hackerspace
>
> Given this pattern (which isn't a rule of course), what are the rough
> timeframe, cost estimate, and responsibility looking like for CCL? I mean,
> does CCL intend to build these walls, or is CCL inclined to ask Sudo to
> participate, chip-in, etc. Or is this something to be proposed as an Omni
> Collective development as part of building build-out or otherwise?
>
> I think the most likely scenario is that we'll throw everything in there,
> then start putting together a plan for real walls in a 6-month period, with
> designs, etc.
>
> However, one immediate alternative is to isolate biohacking to the
> basement (some of which is earmarked for CCL/sudo already), perhaps
> construct a library, lounge, meeting room, or even soem sort of CCL/sudo
> shared (event?) space in the bocce ball court, avoiding wall-building,
> using what's already in the building, and avoiding potential contamination.
> I'm open to other ideas, but just wanted to throw this out there:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Patrik D'haeseleer <patrikd at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> [Cross-posting from sudo room to CCL]
>>
>> Lots of good points from Matt. I'm probably a bit more optimistic about
>> the Omni, but it's important to have some of these things nailed down.
>>
>> I just wanted to expand on some of the issues regarding sharing space
>> with CCL. We haven't really talked through the logistics of any of this,
>> but this is my personal opinion of what we'll likely need to do:
>>
>> Regardless of whether we move in together at the Omni or at 8th & Alice,
>> CCL will almost certainly need to have all or most of its lab space walled
>> off. We were kidding about how great it would be to put up plexiglass
>> partitions, so people can watch the caged science-monkeys at work, but we
>> do need to have access control over the lab space.
>>
>> We'll also need to avoid sharing airspace with anything that creates too
>> much dust, since that's a big contamination issue for any experiments we
>> do. So we may either need to put a ceiling over the lab space, ask sudoroom
>> to keep any dust generating equipment (especially woodworking!) in a dust
>> containing enclosure, or simply agree not to do that type of work in the
>> same space with us.
>>
>> I'd imagine we would likely still have some small open social space as
>> well though. And we may even have a small amount of accessible lab space to
>> do any food-grade experimentation (kombucha, cheese making, distillation,
>> you name it...).
>>
>> So yeah - talking about having collective use of the whole space sounds
>> nice. But the reality is that CCL will likely need to wall itself off to
>> some extent, because of the nature of what we do. Hopefully we can make
>> those walls as transparent as possible ;-)
>>
>> Patrik
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Matthew Senate <mattsenate at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> notes in-line below:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I know not everyone will agree with this argument - I know maybe
>>>> something better and more utopian may come by - but are we really going to
>>>> wait forever for the perfect building on top of a bart station? It's not
>>>> perfect, but I'm not down for waiting for utopia. I'm down for hacking one
>>>> together, which is what this is.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Shouldn't we be closer to BART / PT (@Phil) ?*
>>>> It's true, the Omni is 8 blocks from MacArthur BART, so, 5 whole blocks
>>>> longer than we currently walk.
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is the time cost of 5 extra blocks mean a 'fraction' of those who now
>>>> come to Sudo will come to the Omni?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>> *Okay.. But can we all actually pay the freaking rent (@Matt)? *
>>>> In short, yes. Unless Sudo backs out. In which case, no.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm more interested in the following question.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Can we prove we can pay the rent, with concrete information (@Matt)?* Yes..
>>>> but, I'm actually not sure how to do this on a public listserv? I can say
>>>> the following:
>>>>
>>>> - We presently have a combination of donations and a long-term
>>>> no-interest loan by people in our community that will cover first months'
>>>> rent and deposit (move-in costs).
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is in addition to the month-to-month rent commitments made by the
>>>> collectives (and their delegates) themselves. We knew the barrier to entry
>>>> in the form of move-in costs would be a big burden on us. But you know,
>>>> this is what we have been fundraising for, again, for months. This did not
>>>> materialize overnight. It was the result of a lot of hard work.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course, appreciated work, that you yourself once said would be worth
>>> it regardless of The Omni itself.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Rental amounts have been discussed by member collectives and
>>>> delegates for months in most cases, at every meeting. These amounts have
>>>> fluctuated to reflect reality of what members can afford. Everyone knows
>>>> what is at stake. This is not just a fairytale dream.. well heck, it is a
>>>> dream, but a dream we have all worked hard to bring to the brink of
>>>> reality. Does it involve a level of trust? Yes - of course. Do I have any
>>>> doubts that we won't pull through? At this point? No.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's nice to hear these things, but ambiguity can be eliminated if the
>>> numbers and plan are simply written down and handed out.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Am I expected to dump suitcases full of cash onto the conference
>>>> table Wednesday, or.. Anyone who wants more details on this please email me
>>>> offlist or just ring me?
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>> *What are the terms of the lease (i.e. the full contract)?*
>>>> Ok - the proposed terms of the lease are finally just now starting to
>>>> be negotiated, in that we are finally starting to actually make
>>>> counterproposals.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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?
>>>
>>>
>>>> - We can collectively afford our rent as is, at least for the first
>>>> year. I will show you the spreadsheets.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>> - We will have the first+deposit covered by donations and interest-free
>>>> personal loan.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If we agree to this.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Sudo's part would be $2K/mo.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>> *Lease length (2 years, 3 years?) (@Matt):*
>>>> - We can sign a 2 or longer year lease. Up to us. Less than 2 years
>>>> would be a hard sell. More than 2 years is easier.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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?
>>>
>>>
>>>> *Landlord in or out? (@Matt):*
>>>> - Up to us entirely: If he can stay there for ~3 months while he moves,
>>>> the rent will be a lot lower for those months. If we don't want him to
>>>> stay, he'll vacate in 30 days, but then we dont get a break during those
>>>> first ~three months.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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?)
>>>
>>>
>>>> *What are the terms of space usage? (@Matt)*
>>>>
>>>> In the current envisioning, Sudo would have to itself:
>>>> - Half the bocce ball court room (giant back area), shared with CCL in
>>>> the other half
>>>> - This area is handicapped accessible, with handicapped-accessible
>>>> bathrooms, & street access.
>>>> - This area has massive, 55ft(?) ceilings with ample space to make
>>>> add'l rooms, lofts, balconies, etc
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>> *Who moves where? (@Matt)*
>>>>
>>>> All groups: have use of shared space
>>>>
>>>> We need to go over the floor plan, but point being - we do have a space
>>>> for everyone that people are good with
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Which areas are exclusive (private) or inclusive (common)? (@Matt):*
>>>>
>>>> Shared areas:
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> - big ol cafe to hang out in
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>>> members of) Omni Oakland sub-collectives?*
>>>> To some extent re: how the delegate structure works, see:
>>>>
>>>> https://sudoroom.org/wiki/The_Omni/2014-04-03#The_Omni_Oakland_Collective
>>>>
>>>> In terms of conflict resolution, that has come up several times and we
>>>> are working on that now - we are looking at the terms Sudo uses that (from
>>>> what I understand) were originally cribbed from Noisebridge. This is an
>>>> area we need to work on - we have been mostly focused on the financials,
>>>> apportioning space and accruing the will to come together and do this.
>>>>
>>>> We also have to work more on our articles of incorporation and
>>>> association. We are working actively on that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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?
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Additionally, what rights and responsibilities do members of the
>>>> public (or as I usually say for sudo, which I think applies here,
>>>> "prospective members" of any of our collectives) have? (@Matt)*
>>>>
>>>> In broad terms - my view:
>>>>
>>>> For the entire space, members of the public have a responsibility to
>>>> abide by the accepted rules of the space assented to by all the collectives
>>>> within it, which will be akin to the safe space policy Sudo currently has
>>>> in place @ 2141, and although we haven't voted on it yet, a conflict
>>>> resolution policy in line with what Sudo already has.
>>>>
>>>> Each collective additionally maintains its own subset of rules for
>>>> itself and members of the public in its own localized dedicated area within
>>>> the building, that are not in conflict with rules and values for the whole
>>>> space.
>>>>
>>>> Its conceivable that the public may not be allowed free reign over 100%
>>>> of the space and its materials all the time. For example, I can imagine if
>>>> there are dance rehearsals, Live Space may not always want that public. If
>>>> there is film development going on in a darkroom, its possible they may not
>>>> want the door open randomly. If TIL's letterpress machine is in the
>>>> basement, the public may need to be trained on how to use it before using
>>>> it. The same way that not everyone has access to root on Sudo's Mediawiki
>>>> off the bat - there are conditions. CCL may have machines and rooms that
>>>> not everyone in the public is able to just freely use unless they have the
>>>> requisite knowledge. Stuff like that. Make sense..?
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>> *For existing member collectives can we start collecting rent
>>>> contributions immediately (to be paid forward to rent after any agreed-upon
>>>> contract is signed)? (@Matt)*
>>>>
>>> This has been discussed obviously. We will start this forthwith.
>>>> Remember we have donations and a loan that forms the basis of the barriers
>>>> to entry. We just received paperwork of our CA NP status, so we can open a
>>>> bank account just for the collective. Partly we're also waiting on Land
>>>> Trust fiscal sponsorship which will make things easier on donors. But the
>>>> money is there, with or without that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140415/1cb039e6/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: tmplab_and_la_paillasse.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18622 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20140415/1cb039e6/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: omni_ccl_sudo_idea.png
Type: image/png
Size: 26318 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20140415/1cb039e6/attachment-0001.png>