IT IS TIME......we need to be owned by an organization

[Cadence Theas]

Cleo, perhaps you can explain to us what possible relationship your last post has to the idea of taking CDS out of Sudane's hands and placing it in the hands of the board of an organization or a corporation? Little or none it would seem. The fact that CDS has gone through a few crisis moments before and has always come out of it, the fact that we are in a moment of growth, it would seem to recommend the idea of maintaining the status quo in terms of sim ownership. How many organization or corporate-owned sims can claim a vibrant ten-year history? You are inventing issues where there aren't any, creating villains out of neighbors, and creating drama when we should be concentrating on the real issues that are affecting CDS.

[Pip Torok]

We might be alive but have not grown since then Cadence...

We had the AA "merger snafu" and since then the CDS has remained in the hands of a few and seen a decline and stagnation. Until the past several months that is, and despite SL being in decline, CDS has now regained its financial solvency and is growing............ But the reason to bring it up again now is that we are not only still alive. But we are no longer dying .. we are growing again and financially solvent again for the first time since the merger failed.

it might be time to make sure we are "sustainable"

.
.
and it might be time to make manifest these non-sequiturs you bring-up, CLEOPATRA.

Pip Torok

[cleopatraxigalia]

I'm sorry you two don't see the connection. I sure do. And are you saying cds is simply five of Sudanes Sims. This idea is contrary to the constitution. The idea of having cds owned by a nonprofit ( which Sudane her self could actually run and direct ) is far from new and precedes my existence in sl. Many people have promoted and explored this idea for years. It is how we were to be set up if the merger had gone through. The idea itself is good in my opinon ... it's complicated and has some glitches but would support us being sustainable imho. I was reading an article written about cds after the merger failed that confirms also that cds has been declining since. But we are not declining now. And it is prudent to plan for growth I understand your concern but also wonder how much knowledge you have of American Non-Profit organizations? Or are you opposed because it's me who brought it up? Perhaps there are similar constructs in other nations we could explore if you don't like the idea of it being American.

or maybe we just sell the Sims to Sudane outright and call a spade a spade and not make her do all the alt juggling with rudeen . Or should we be calling ourselves a constitutional monarchy

PS cadence ....thanks for having an open mind

[Rosie Gray]

Or should we be calling ourselves a constitutional monarchy

If we were a constitutional monarchy, Cleo, we would still be a democracy. We'd be joining the ranks of Canada, Belgium, Belize, Denmark, Jamaica, Japan, Australia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Cambodia, Barbados, Bahamas... oh yeah the United Kingdom, and more. Doesn't seem so bad

Perhahps you are thinking of an absolute monarchies, such as Vatican City or Saudi Arabia.

[cleopatraxigalia]

Good point rosie. I'm not really saying we are anything. I am suggesting we get ourselves set up so that Sudane /Rudeen have an organization around them, an entity to hold the title to the Sims lest we be seen as some sort of monarchy. The fact Sudane has taken care of us for 10 years is an undeniable supreme gift and act of generosity beyond compare. For us to set up CDS so that it can survive all of us would do nothing but honor her.

[Cadence Theas]

My mind is very open, Cleo. I am just suspicious of proposals that allege to try to fix something that already works very well.

If you are so keen on the idea, take the time to write a working or draft proposal to present here for discussion, otherwise it is just words to create drama.

[JerryDon Lane]

I can see some problems with the present situation.

I have no doubt that the estate owner is more than honest and above-board in her intentions. In fact, her track record seems impeccable, manifesting in a top-notch reputation that's beyond reproach. But that is not the issue, good business practices are.

CDS is not only an estate, it is a part of Sudane's personal estate when we consider the laws that regulate these issues. What happens if Sudane becomes incapacitated? What happens to CDS if she is in an accident or suddenly drops over with a heart attack? These are macabre scenarios, but they are scenarios that exhibit the reality of life. CDS would go the route that all the rest of her assets take, probably to her children if she falls among common statistics and they can then do with it what they will.

Also, having a single person "own" a democracy seems almost an oxymoron and I'm quite surprised that the citizens allowed it to be set up this way.

Issues like this are a perfect example of those pestering, unresolved issues I hope we can begin to work on as a community this year.

One answer, of course, as has been suggested, it to form a legal entity, an S-corp, a C-corp, or an LLC, have Sudane sell the assets to that entity for a dollar, which then would become a corporate land-holder with Linden Labs. The citizens could own the shares, collect dividends (or they could go into a general fund) and elect proxies and a corporate board of directors. This is a very valid solution, but it is only one of them.

A less radical approach might appeal to some.

Inter vivos trusts (living trusts) are very popular in the U.S., Britain and in fact all of the signors of the Hague Convention treaties where countries agreed to honor one anther's contracts. That's almost all the civilized ones.

Sudane and/or others could be named the trustee(s) of this trust and there would be successor trustees named to succeed her and the others when that time comes. This way, little would really change, but the future of CDS would be protected.

I would encourage the RA to work with the incoming Chancellor on this to bring solid, proactive solutions to this problem and to others similar to it.

The appointment of a special commission (board or committee) to study the issue and to suggest appropriate solutions would seem a good first step, don't you think? Sudane might even be appointed to chair it, if she's so inclined.

[Garnet Psaltery]

I'm astonished at people blithely talking about what Sudane should or should not do. What are you trying to do, wear her down so she gives in?

[Rosie Gray]

Instead of starting from scratch on this conversation that has been well hashed over before, it would be a good idea to review the previous conversation: http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... ies#p15689 The context was different but the issue is the same.

[Tor Karlsvalt]

Thank you Rosie for linking that discussion to this thread. I so remember this controversy. At the time there was a great deal of mistrust between two factions in CDS. Our newer members will not know of this, unless perhaps it has been discussed. At the time there was the unfounded worry that the AA non-profit holding company would somehow take direct control over all the CDS sims and turn them into non-profit sims and undermine our democracy. That aside several issues come to mind.

First, as Sudane mentions we cannot trust LL to be consistent. Al Andalus is a case in point. It existed as a non-profit estate and befitted from the LL non-profit discount. The six regions of AA, all but one full regions, were an attractive asset for CDS to acquire. Not long after the our estates separated, LL ended the discount and dramatically forced Al Andalus to change its business plan. Alas, AA is no more.

Second, changing the status of our sims would forever alter our tier. Currently, CDS has three sims with grandfathered tier. These are advantages of age. Recently, LL has re-instituted the non-profit deduction. If CDS were to become non-profit we would indeed see a reduction in our tier. However, LL is fickle. If LL changed its policy, we would lose our currently grandfathered rate for NFS, CN and Monastery. As we have seen with Al Andalus, LL has made drastic changes with regard to the non-profit tier. In contrast, they have not changed their policy on grandfathered rates. Rates protected as long as Rudeen continues to own the sims.

Third, I remember some were very concerned about control of the holding company being closely held by board members who were willing to link their RL selves with their SL avatars. As many in SL, indeed CDS, closely guard their RL identities, this seemed another restriction that would give some of us more authority than those who choose anonymity.

There may indeed come a time when it is wise to pursue having an RL holding company for CDS. Now might not be the best time. At the moment, I think we should focus on LA and possibly a new sim.

[Callipygian]

This was actually addressed in 2011, by Sudane herself. The thread is here.

http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 772#p17772

As a result, it went to RA, was discussed and some 'this needs to be done' items identified, read through the RA transcript here:

http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3530

Whether or not those things were ever completed I don't know, but this was considered to be a satisfactory solution at the time.

Calli

[JerryDon Lane]

Very well, you made some points, Tor, however we disagree. I'm one that firmly believes government can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time. If government is competent, it should be able to deal with governmental issues as they come up, not simply ignore most of them and let them fester like a maggot infested wound while we concentrate on only one or two of our pet projects. Incompetent management is how we came to have such mistrust of government in CDS, at least it seems many citizens I have spoken to feel this way.

We can focus on LA, we can focus on a new sim, we can focus on returning ownership of the CDS sims to the people, we can focus on proper zoning laws, building codes, covenant restrictions and covenant clarity, code clarity and organization, promotion of CDS, new laws that are needed, reform of the old ones, etc., etc., and we can do this all at once. How do you think people run something the size of Chicago?

if the government in power cannot effectively manage something as small and uncomplicated as 5 sims in SL consisting of 70 or 80 residents by getting control of issues such as this and permanently resolving them, then that government simply needs to be replaced as there are myriad examples both in SL and RL where much more complex systems are being run quite efficiently by people who are capable.

If there are stumbling blocks to overcome, we need to work together to overcome them. As example, I mentioned above that there are other ways to return ownership of this democracy to the people other than changing the ownership to corporate through Linden Labs. Why not look at them? What is wrong with new vision..... conquering some new horizons....taking our little democratic experiment to new heights and new levels? The latter is exactly what we would accomplish if we instilled ownership of a democracy where it belongs: in the hands of the people. In fact, we need to stop looking at the reasons why we CANNOT do certain things that are in the best interest of the people and invest our time figuring out how we CAN accomplish them. This issue is just one of many that fall into that category.

[JerryDon Lane]

Thanks for bringing me up to speed on that, Calli......I'll read up. You are mighty handy to have around these forums....*wink*