meet.coop community is distinct from WebTV community, and relationship is different.
WebTV BBB is not public-open, users are individual organisations with service agreements and direct user relationships w WebTV. “We have a few unions, a few associations, a few cities”. meet.coop BBB is seen more like a public utility (actually, part of a commons), users are seen as a community (or a convergence of various communities) - in dialogue with meet.coop and each other (notably thro the forum, also in commons.hour).
WebTV values this different kind of relationship, and feels there might be expansion of horizons and scope there for them. @gcotnoir confirm?
To be explored:
- Open a conversation with Gèrald LaRose (WebTV President) around coop laws of Quebec. (Gabriel, mh)
- meet. coop could (should? must?) become a member of WebTV, with its own service agreement?
- meet. coop must have an organisational-formal identity?
- Basic question for any coop: who gets to shut it down? This isn’t clear yet. what are we proposing about this? Where does the power lie, in making final decisions about the ongoing life and mission/vision of meet. coop ?
- What entity will meet. coop subscribers be members of? A legal entity (coop with constitution, assemblies, board, etc)? An informal ‘movement’ organisation (even so, with elected leadership, and deliberation on strategy, inclusion, etc? like MayFirst @jamie )? See: Evolution #1 - meet.coop Board & WebTV board Define the relationship - #2 by mikemh above.