Freecad could gain acceptance, but not OSArch.
Freecad could gain acceptance, but not OSArch.
@MaartenFrough lots to read there. Didn't really find anything I don't agree with. So thanks for a really interesting contribution to this discussion. Of course a lot of your points would need more consideration to be put into action.
One thing where I would say "yes... and" is about local chapters. I would be very keen for existing groups to just mark their support by joining rather than osarch setting something up. There are lots of Dynamo Users Groups ad AECHackathon groups out there who could be very open to having a relationship with us in some way. I see advantages to puting our ideas/brand/movement inside existing structures whenever possible rather than creating our own structures.
Another interesting thing I hear recently is the idea (which the European parliament uses) that leading the committee is on a rotation basis. This has in studies been shown to help avoid the egotistical types - since they can't be sure of having power any time soon. No, I can't remember where I heard this ... probably a TED Talk. I think that's a really interesting idea.
Thanks @MaartenFrough for your perspective. A few comments
I think starting local chapters is a good idea, but I don't think the OSArch organization is big enough, currently, to warrant it. In other organizations, it seems local chapters are introduced when the organization get so big they need another 'tier' to help organize things.
Yes, having developers be a key make up of the organization is key, but also believe users should be equally represented. I think that's one shortcoming of BuildingSmart, that users are not being represented enough.
Instead of making up our own rules on how board members are established, I think we should try and embrace, as much as possible, third party platforms that facilitate Collaborative e-democracy, Open-source governance or Decentralized autonomous organization. By embracing a 3rd party 'platform' it will make decisions easier and insure 'distributed' management of the organization.
Examples
List of other DAO's https://defiprime.com/dao
Granted it's still relatively early days for these types of platforms, but being that OSArch is small, and in it's early days as well, I think it would be worth our while to co-evolve with these platforms as well.
The word of experience... :)
https://code.blender.org/2021/02/module-teams-for-core-blender-development/
@theoryshaw can you update the page below with details of the gitlab project you've started?
https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=Donation_Directory
The project about making drawings awesome is also missing.
This podcast has some interesting episodes about funding and community building
This thread about writing a reply to a CAD newsletter has implications for governance: https://community.osarch.org/discussion/468/autodesk-wants-to-kill-the-file
This proposal about supporting a project has implications for this thread: https://community.osarch.org/discussion/470/fustic-future-sustainable-territories-infrastructures-and-cities
I would like to suggest that we open for nominations to a temporary steering committee. We can see how many people are nominated and accept and then see if there is a need to do any more.
Why?
I think we are mature enough to make some decisions a bit faster. We can voice our support for specific projects, we can make an activity plan for the coming year, we can start discussing concrete ways of gathering funds, talk to specific people on behalf of OSArch and so on. Of course some of this could be done in a much slower process, but I suggest we have a steering committee who can propose plans of action and then, with consent, begin implementing them. Initially I think anyone who has written themselves on the supporters page can nominate anyone else (best to ask the person first) and then we can see where things are.
I have some suggestions to what the steering committee should have top of the agenda
submit a description of their role in OSArch for consent by members/supporters
make a plan for creating a legal entity
Make a plan for creating a stronger replacement committee with a broader foundation in the AEC community
I suggest the temporary steering committee has a life of 12 months with the aim of being replaced by something more permanent as soon as practical.
What could go wrong?
We want to be careful and slow about making any structural decisions that have long reaching consequences. A temporary steering committee could speak on behalf of the groups, that means they could say things someone doesn't like. That's just life.
Here's the text of a comment @Moult wrote in the chat of our monthly meetup. For now it's just here as a record.
_Text summary:
2 week public window on forums for all new proposals in association with OSArch
Duncan to lead legal representation of OSArch, he is the decision maker
Scope of legal representation of OSArch is money and enterprise affiliation only
Nominate small group of people who we consider represent OSArch values. These people have the power to "prevent" a project being associated with OSArch, this is only relevant in proposals that deal with legal/enterprise affiliation. Other project specific decision making is unaffected._
Another potential partner organization: CITA BIM Group (they just followed us on Twitter) ... we don't really have a list of potential partners.
@theoryshaw how about we organize a chat specifically to talk generically about organizational structures - not to choose one but to discuss their advantages / disadvantages? How many would like that chat? I think we had a really interesting talk the other day and one issue I'd like to explore more is how we make sure that some issues have very clear decisions structures (for exampel distribution of funds needs to be a robust process everyone understand and respects) and some issues have more fluid ways of working, and many projects are just none of our business - they're just our friends. One thing I got our of the discussion is that it would be good to clearly define the boundaries of any formal committee like structure to some specific areas. I'm pretty sure we all agree on what those areas would be - but the discussion is still important.
Thank you Duncan and everyone for all of your work on this. It is so great to see this organization come into being and developing over the last year!
Sorry to start this thread and then disappear. I have been working on a tangentially relevant issue converting my business to a worker owned cooperative https://www.regenerativedesigngroup.com/worker-owned/ which I am excited to say has happened but still needs a lot of work.
I would be excited to continue to be a part of this conversation unfortunately I am a bit overwhelmed at the moment and can not take on any more commitments.
@baswein awesome news and congrats. I hope we hear from you about how it goes.
@duncan : I would like to have that chat, count me in
@baswein : great to see!
Here is a German based fund for public interest FOSS
Another potential partner firm:
https://engys.com/products @Jesusbill , I'm thinking you might know them?
Nope, not really. They are in the Mechanical/Automotive Industry. Not sure it can be a fit for OSArch to be honest.
@Jesusbill said:
Nope, not really. They are in the Mechanical/Automotive Industry. Not sure it can be a fit for OSArch to be honest.
It's used in Rambøll centre of excellence advanced simulations https://ramboll.com/digital-solutions/buildings/cfd-technology
@duncan great to see! CFD for wind analysis in structures is starting to be feasible nowadays.
We are also working in Aether Engineering in a Structural Wind Analysis Implementation, I think soon we will have something worthwhile to show. So, yes they could be a potential partner firm
@Moult , we would like to make a donation to the OpenSourceBIM with 501 c. Is there a way to avoid the 10% fee? we can send check or credit card. thanks
@EddieHe unfortunately I'm not aware of any. If you'd like to donate directly to an individual developer, you can use either https://liberapay.com/dionmoult for myself or https://github.com/sponsors/aothms for Thomas but they are not 501c I believe, though you do avoid the 10% fee.
Ping @duncan , @theoryshaw , @Moult - for our next monthly meeting, do you think it would possible for (a) knowledgable individual(s) amongs the community to :
Prepare a quick presentation on organisational structures/platforms that could work for OSArch ?
Draft a proposal regarding the funding strategies & allocation of funds & finance management.
This would ensure we understand what the implications are , discuss the pros/cons, and lead us to take a collective decision there and then on how to proceed?
Given that we're about to tackle a new project: 4D/5D with IFC - which @Moult and I will be co-leading - I am personally very eager to see this happen, in order to get some sponsors on board for the said project once we have a solid proof of concept to present.
@EddieHe I suggest you take up Dion Moults suggestion of donating to one of them. Otherwise you can look through our page listing where you can donate https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=Donation_Directory
@EddieHe can I ask is this just a personal donation or as part of/on behalf of some larger group?
@Moult I've added OpenSourceBIM to the donations page, but as you say they have no direct way to receive funding. You might want to get them to add you to the https://github.com/orgs/opensourceBIM/people page.
@Moult @duncan . thanks. we will use the liberapay approach. it is a personal donation.
@duncan I believe I'm already on https://github.com/orgs/opensourceBIM/people - but I think he is referring to https://opencollective.com/opensourcebim
Login or Register to reply.