[Noisebridge-discuss] Hologlyphic-Movie/Noisbridge grant funding re-application

rachel lyra hospodar rachel at mediumreality.com
Wed Nov 23 15:27:36 PST 2011


If you have a fiscal sponsor then i guess what you are looking for is
just permission to write 'walter funk and noisebridge(tm)' all over your
application?  Hm, as well as claiming what sounds like it might be a
sizeable chunk of common area down the road.  I will admit that the
language of your letter implies a level of support that is kind of
imaginary.  Institutions are inherently kind of imaginary, though, and
use of the institutional name to further your project in this way is
reasonable.

If it was me writing a letter of intent, it would probably include
language about the actual project more prominently, and lead less with
the organization that doesn't even know it's sponsoring yet.

Can you talk more to us about the amount of space you envision needing
for this project??

R.

On 11/23/2011 3:15 PM, Walter Funk wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>    I looked at the Noisetor Wiki, thanks.
> 
>   There is a fiscal sponsor for this project, an umbrella group,who will
> handle the finances such as taxes, also reporting to the grant-maker if
> funding is approved.
> 
>   They are very experienced, working with non-profits and artists if
> part of their mission.
> 
> http://artsandmedia.net/programs-2
> 
>   Would it help to Noisebridge to have them do all that? They can also
> help with agreements, etc.
> 
>    Seems like more focus on making cool 3D stuff.
> 
> ~Walter
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* rachel lyra hospodar <rachel at mediumreality.com>
> *To:* Rubin Abdi <rubin at starset.net>
> *Cc:* Walter Funk <marybraindoe at yahoo.com>;
> "noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net"
> <noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 23, 2011 2:47 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Hologlyphic-Movie/Noisbridge grant
> funding re-application
> 
> This is a fiscal sponsorship to the tune of $30k...that is a significant
> financial relationship you are proposing.
> 
> It's a good thing we have started developing a framework for this, from
> Noisetor.  We made Noisetor creators jump through a bunch of hoops to
> make sure that we have a sound agreement regarding the financial
> obligations incurred in such a relationship.
> 
> I think it's pretty important to hammer out that kind of agreement.
> 
> If the tone of the discussion next week is good, it probably could be
> done in parallel with your letter of intent, as long as you are under
> the understanding that the sponsorship may not be approved if consensus
> is not reached.
> 
> Please check out the noisetor wiki page if you need a starting point for
> what kind of agreement i am talking about.  Even trusted longstanding
> members of the community can become a little lax in fulfilling their
> obligations, and for everyone's peace of mind it's important to spell
> out what those obligations are ahead of time.
> 
> R.
> 
> 
> On 11/23/2011 2:30 PM, Rubin Abdi wrote:
>> Hi Walter.
>>
>> Last night at the meeting you wanted to talk about your project and this
>> letter of intent to be indorsed by Noisebridge. You were asked to hold
>> off talking about it till a more appropriate time in the meeting.
>>
>> It seems as though it wasn't clear to Jim or Shannon or anyone else at
>> the meeting that you actually wanted to bring this action up as a
>> discussion item, to be consented on at our next meeting (Nov 29th). If
>> you remember we spoke about this after the meeting was over, and that
>> generally through miscommunication we never brought it up formally as a
>> discussion item. Since you have a due date to work worth, you wanted to
>> know if there was any way to bring this item up for consensus on the
>> 29th without having it actually getting discussed at the meeting that
>> just passed.
>>
>> My advice to you was to bring up this mishap on the discussion list and
>> see if anyone would object to you pushing for consensus next week by
>> holding discussion for the item on the mailing list, in addition to the
>> actually item you want to achieve consensus on. However I don't see text
>> from your previous email regarding any of that, nor are you even asking
>> for consensus.
>>
>> Did I miss something? When we were chatting?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list