Crowdfunding Platform

This is to discuss setting up and using a crowdfunding platform to pay for the running and development of CoTech.
Proposal here: https://www.loomio.org/p/JdEslGIM/cotech-members-should-be-able-to-propose-and-crowdfund-projects-

Poll Created Tue 28 Nov 2017
CoTech members should be able to propose and crowdfund projects. Closed Wed 29 Nov 2017
There have been no critical concerns, so the CoBudget instance will be set up and used according to the guidelines set out here.
This is to cover mainly one-time costs, e.g.:
- The bar tab at Wortley Hall;
- A package of improvements for the CoTech website;
- Hiring a network coordinator for three months.
But could also cover running costs, e.g.:
- Hosting the CoTech website for a year.
The proposal is as follows:
- Projects can be proposed by any co-op, even if the are unable to contribute funds.
- Proposals have a kickstarter model of funding, so happen if they are fully funded and do not happen otherwise.
- Proposals can be blocked by two vetoes. The number "two" was chosen because if a co-op has a good reason for their veto, they should be able to convince another co-op to join them (in vetoing the proposal).
- Proposals must state how they would benefit CoTech and should be collaborative when possible.
- Proposals must be SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant, Time bound).
- There is no central account or escrow – money is paid directly to the beneficiaries.
- Proposals specify when payment should be made (e.g. before work begins, on completion of work, in stages, etc).
- In case of conflict: parties should agree on a third party mediator. If no third party can be agreed upon, then the CoTech network must propose and choose this mediator.
- We will use an open-source crowdfunding platform.
Results
Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Agree | 100.0% | 8 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Abstain | 0.0% | 0 | ||
Disagree | 0.0% | 0 | ||
Block | 0.0% | 0 | ||
Undecided | 0% | 103 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
8 of 111 people have voted (7%)

Bradley Reeder
Tue 28 Nov 2017
Sounds good. The reasoning for 2 blocking votes seems sensible and could be picked up by the team formulating our general decision-making process.

Sion Whellens (Principle Six/Calverts) Sat 2 Dec 2017
V kind Roy! I put in £50 from Principle six too ...

Aptivate Cooperators Thu 30 Nov 2017
Hmmm, the proposal was closed? Was this because it was accepted at Wortley Hall or? I agree with it and think it's a good proposal btw.
Roy Brooks · Wed 29 Nov 2017
On which, .. with only Sion representing, GS would like to put a token £50 towards the bar tab for this year