Hi Tom,
Ah! the need for a multiplicity of forms for action and organising is so interesting.
 
We have been running the DAOWO labs for a couple of years, to bring critical attention to the potential impacts of Decentralised Autonomous Organisations on the blockchain. We ran one on "Doing Good" and what you say confirms one of the main things that I learned. This was around the limits of good ideas, tools, mechanisms and even laws, to support action and organisation without communities and their ecosystems. 

However it does seem odd that coops should not be more easily formed, recognised and integrated in cultural and community contexts. Why was it not the right form of organisation for campaigning?

cheers!
Ruth


On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 10:31 AM Tom Keene <tom@theanthillsocial.co.uk> wrote:
Hi all,
Interesting thread.

On Cressingham Gardens Estate where I live, we're currently setting up our own tenant management organisation and explored a coop option, but as we have a very complex relationship with Lambeth Council (i.e intention to demolish through regeneration) the coop structure didn't seem to fit. We are now about to become a Community Interest Company (CIC).

Interestingly, Lambeth appointed itself as the UK's first 'cooperative council' though in reality this is meaningless. When housing officers attempted to enact a cooperative approach they didn't have a clue what it meant in practice, and said as much. The officers (and councillors) practice is based around tight control of information through existing technical systems, though they don't particularly recognise the role of technology. Weirdly, Lambeth Labour party councillors partnered and campaigned under a joint Labour/Coopertive Party banner. In other words, they co-opted (I do like a pun;) the term cooperative to make their policies of social cleaning through urban regeneration more palatable. 

What I've learnt through my experience of housing activism (trying to stop a council demolishing my home) is that multiple organisational structures are required to intervene in, alter, or instigate new power dynamics. On Cressingham, for example, there's a Residents Association, Community Interest company, Save Cressingham Campaign (organised around an anarchist model), and a formal council structure based on a written constitution. Each of which presents different possibilities of action - you need this fluidity or ability to participate in different structures to address a problems from multiple, simultaneous, directions. This multiplicity is required because they things we are dealing undergo constant change which is a central problem of capitalism... Can you tell i'm in the middle of my PhD writeup  ;)

Tom


On Thu, 2 May 2019, at 10:06 PM, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
Dear Julian,

It's great to hear that you have finally got some traction for the development work that you want to do. I would be v. interested to hear how it goes.

I've been interested in cooperatives as one (incomplete and partial I know) route to democratising work and money flows - following the debates around platform cooperatives, open cooperatives, and the Preston model (where the local authority has committed to favouring local and cooperatively run services in public procurement decisions, with great benefits to the local economy).

I've followed the rocky journey of Resonate to build a blockchain-based cooperative music service. And what I know of their experience chimes with the article when it says...

"cooperatives are more difficult to bootstrap than corporations because they don’t have access to the same capital markets. Historically, it’s been a lot harder to coordinate investment from members with shared values than it is to raise funds with the singular goal of maximizing profits"

We have often entertained formalising more cooperative organisational forms for Furtherfield projects, but have been put off by the administrative overheads and legal complexities and costs. The potential for DAOs to lighten the bureaucratic load is therefore very attractive!

Look forward to hearing more about CoopDAO
:)
Ruth



On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, 10:39 Julian Brooks, <lists@julianbrooks.net> wrote:
Hey Ruth,

Yeah I also found that article of interest too.
Insight from VC's, who'd a thunk it.

I've been digging into Coops for the last couple of years. For me stems
from a visceral reaction to DAO's & 'Code as Law'. I just immediately
thought it'd be better to consider them more human-centric - with DAO's
being such a potential for collectivising power.

So started putting this kinda mental construct together 'Cooperative
Autonomous Organisations', a sort of 'DAO, Coop, Mutual, Union' - type
structure. This was to house the participants in the music licensing /
smart contracts / IP-reinvention post-doc project that I have been
attempting to raise research funding for (unsuccessfully so far).

I always thought the CoAO would be the trickiest part to put together,
and was actually planning to work in this during years 3-5 in a 5yr
project. After getting rejected for funding last October (working w.
UoMcr proposing to AHRC) I started exploring and getting involved with
the 'Aragon Project' community (cool people with some astonishing [&
really-existing] crypto tech-tools).

A small Aragon group started seriously considering and engaging in what
a Cooperative DAO could be in practice. To this end I put togehter a
small funding proposal that was voted though by $ANT holders (the Aragon
token) a couple of days ago (whoop whoop!). So there'll be two of us
working a couple of days a week each, with additional funds for CoopDAO
members to also propose paid work a day p.w. to formulate and put into
practice what this org can actually be.

Quite excited:)



Totally agree Coops are definitely 'a thing' atm. For me, this is a very
good thing. Also fascinating that (Ethereum mainly?) crypto is very much
engaging in this too.

I don't know where this is all going, perhaps this is what I like most.

J.

On 28/04/2019 15:21, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour wrote:
> Thanks Rob,
> Full of great nuggets as always
>
>     Past, Present, Future: From Co-ops to Cryptonetworks -
>
>
>
> Coops seem to be on the upsurge.
> I'd be interested to know whether people here are already members of
> coops as workers or customers and if so why?
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     NetBehaviour mailing list
>
>
>
> --
> Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised
> Arts Lab
> +44 (0) 77370 02879
>
> *Furtherfield *disrupts and democratises art and technology through
> exhibitions, labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free
> thinking.
>
> *DECAL* Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0
> technologiesresearch hub
>
> for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies now.
>
>
>
> Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee
> registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
> Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade,
> Tally Ho Corner, London N12 0EH.
>

_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list


_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour


--
Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised Arts Lab
+44 (0) 77370 02879 

Furtherfield disrupts and democratises art and technology through exhibitions, labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free thinking.

DECAL Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0 technologies research hub

for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies now.

decal.is


Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee 
registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205. 
Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade, Tally Ho Corner, London N12 0EH.