Should Social.coop switch its Open Collective "host" to Platform6?
Nathan Schneider
Public
Seen by 12
The way our finance platform Open Collective works, every "collective" (that's us) is part of a "host," which provides the legal and financial backend for the collectives that are part of it. We're currently hosted by OC's default host, the Open Collective Host, a US C corp. It charges a 5% fee, in addition to OC's 5% software fee.
We now have another option. Platform6 is a new UK-based co-op in our network that offers host services on Open Collective. This would enable Social.coop to become legally a cooperative, and to support the broader co-op movement more directly. Platform6 also apparently charges a smaller host fee: 2%.
Shall we explore transferring our host status? I would be happy to take the lead on this.
Poll Created Sat 20 Apr 2019 3:54AM
What do you think of this draft agreement with Platform 6? Closed Tue 23 Apr 2019 3:02AM
We still have yet to finalize this language. We'll continue working with P6 friends to find language we're all comfortable with.
I've drafted an agreement for our "host" relationships with Platform 6.
What do you think? Add comments here. (The "yes" or "no" is just to get you to participate in commenting. Not ready for a proposal yet.)
Results
| Results | Option | Voters | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Yes | 3 |
|
||
| No | 0 | ||||
|
|
Undecided | 3 |
|
3 of 6 people have participated (50%)
Matt Noyes
Sat 20 Apr 2019 5:32AM
Yes/No is not a good format for this poll. Need agree, disagree, abstain... right?
Matthew Cropp
Sat 20 Apr 2019 8:28PM
Simple and clear; I like it. Thanks for your work on this, Nathan!
Graham
Mon 22 Apr 2019 10:10AM
From the Platform 6 perspective, whilst we are very supportive of this initiative, it's fair to say that there is concern about the inclusion of the idea of P6 being a "legal host", and how that might be interpreted. We certainly can't and won't be held legally responsible for any action or inaction on the part of social.coop. We see this partnership as P6 acting as a 'fiscal host' to use OC language, and we'll be keen to work hard at making that mutually beneficial. And open to building on that
Matt Noyes
Mon 22 Apr 2019 8:54PM
Yes/No is not a good format for this poll. Need agree, disagree, abstain... right?
Nathan Schneider Sat 20 Apr 2019 9:22PM
That's right, Matt. I just added some additional language to the proposal for clarity.
Matt Noyes Sun 21 Apr 2019 3:12AM
So, this is like asking "any objections?"
Would it make sense to propose edits directly on the doc?
Nathan Schneider Sun 21 Apr 2019 11:05PM
The idea is that people could propose edits in the comment field of the proposal. Objections, suggestions, whatever. It's just an informal way of garnering input without making it look like a formal proposal at this stage. Do you have any suggestions?
Matt Noyes Mon 22 Apr 2019 9:17PM
Made a couple suggested edits on the doc. Thanks for moving this forward.
Matthew Cropp · Sat 20 Apr 2019 8:29PM
To @mattnoyes' comment, @ntnsndr is this vote a "feedback" round prior to putting it forward for binding adoption? In that case, check poll makes sense, though wording could be more clear.