I also disagree that incorporation is the right path for many of the same
reasons that Jonathan and Dre wrote.  Incorporation will change how
Code4Lib exists and operates, but finding a good fiscal partner can give
C4L continued freedom to be a community it has been. It's still a step of
maturity that Code4Lib needs to do to maintain growth and excellent
conferences.

Tim

On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 1:35 PM Andreas Orphanides <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> I have to disagree with Eric, personally. I think incorporation could mean
> the death of everything that makes Code4Lib work. To me, the essence of
> Code4Lib is its self-organizing nature. Code4Lib isn't an organization;
> it's a community. There's no central body, but somehow every year we pull
> off the best conference in library technology. We have a robust and
> thriving suite of media for communication and idea exchange. No one owns
> the Code4Lib brand or concept, and anyone can organize a Code4Lib event
> just by using the name and embodying the spirit of Code4Lib.
>
> What differentiates Code4Lib from other organizations? It's not the passion
> of the contributors. It's not the topics we address. It's the way that we
> come together as a community organically without needing bylaws,
> governance, holdings, presidents, etc., and still make it work every year,
> year after year. In short, Code4Lib is the only anarchist collective that
> I've ever seen find true success, and that's something special.
>
> To my eyes, the only ongoing existential challenge that Code4Lib has is
> that of fiscal continity *per se*. And if we have an organization that we
> trust that's saying, "You can continue to operate exactly how you are now,
> but you can count on us to represent you financially when needed," that
> seems like the ideal solution. And I think the level of work required for
> fiscal stewardship is quite minimal -- we've been doing it every year for
> I-don't-know-how-long now; this is just making an existing practice extend
> into the longer term.
>
> Are there benefits to incorporation? Maybe. But will those benefits destroy
> the heart of what makes Code4Lib essentially Code4Lib? Without being
> melodramatic, I think this is a real possibility.
>
> I'll be voting for the fiscal sponsorship path.
>
> On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > For what it is worth, I will vote for us to incorporate in lieu of us
> > doing nothing or partnering with a fiscal agent. I have nothing against
> any
> > of the fiscal agents. They are all good groups of people with more things
> > in common than differences. I just think that if we incorporate, then we
> > will have a wider set of options made available to us. The act of
> > incorporating will be empowering. I believe incorporating is in the DIY
> > spirit of our community. I believe incorporating is in the best interest
> of
> > Code4Lib. We have all of the necessary resources: cash, experience, and
> > vision. All we need to do is the work, which will be almost equal to the
> > work involved in creating and managing a relationship with a fiscal
> agent.
> > I think we can make it happen. —Eric Lease Morgan
> >
>
-- 
Tim McGeary
[log in to unmask]
GTalk/Yahoo/Skype/Twitter: timmcgeary
484-294-7660 (Google Voice)