Clarifying misconceptions

Here you might discuss basically everything.

Moderator: SC Moderators

Post Reply
Rose Springvale
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1074
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 12:29 am

Clarifying misconceptions

Post by Rose Springvale »

Misconception 1. AA wants to take over CDS and dissolve representative democracy.
Response. NO. AA in its merger with cds embraces representative democracy. It also has a strong tradition of consensus building. Rather than representative posturing on opposite sides of issues where there is a clear winner and clear loser, AA hopes to bring their desire to find community solutions to CDS. MOST citizens of AA do not want to participate in government, and are just fine with Representatives. I'd venture to say MOST citizens have been approached by only one or two CDS candidates or representatives on a face to face basis, finding themselves instead in a hostile "town hall" run by CDS reps whose main focus is to determing "who said what." AA people like to talk about real issues. They like to make world change... and not just second life world change. They (generalizing) don't feel a need to carry on about the minutiae of the CDS government. They don't need to delay every vote and every action. If they are not on the "winning side" this time, they know they will be the next time.

Every community has outspoken people who say things that are not necessarily true about the majority. Both AA and CDS are guilty of this. Remember most of the people here are moderate. Most of the people here see benefit in parts of what everyone has to say. That's why factions didn't work for many of us. And why i hope we can get representatives who are speaking for the benefit of the entire community in the next election, not one side or another, and not just reacting to things that happened six years ago. Let's move forward.

Misconception 2. AA wants to have a non profit organization take over CDS, dissolve our governemnt and hand over the control to an individual, generally assumed to be Rose.

Reply. AA is owned by a 501 c 3 qualified corporation known as Virtual Democracy Inc. It is owned by a non profit not only to get tier breaks, but because that is the essence of AA. We are covered in educational notecards. Our guided tour tells about the democracy project and the historical relevance of Al Andalus in that context. Our programs center on the culture of the geographical area, the historical context or politics and religion. These are REAL areas of concern and preservation. We have participants from several institutions of higher education, who locate or operate through AA BECAUSE we are non profit. Becoming just another set of sims eliminates those connections.

AS a 501c3 corporation, AA may only distribute its assets to another such organization. None of the assets can inure to the benefit of an individual. So AA doesn't have a choice to 'dissolve its non profit" and turn over the sims to CDS. That is WHY the merger agreement is written the way it is.

Does this mean that CDS MUST form a non profit, and put it's own sims in it? Of course not. But if it isn't going to form its own non profit, it needs to understand how corporate ownership works, and work with VDI to accommodate it. When the merger was adopted, it was understood that if CDS chose not to form its own, then an operating agreement between CDS and VDI would be put in place. I've seen no movement on either.

CDS is an unincorporated entity of several people running a 'business'. In the eyes of the law, that means its a partnership. That means we all are equally responsible for it. We as a community chose to delegate decision making of our partnership to the CDS government structures. If CDS wanted to be a non profit, there are VERY SPECIFIC and complicated rules it must follow to be considered so. That doesn't happen without specific intent and action. So all the rhetoric about AA dissolving the CDS governmental structures is just that.

Why did we leave it open ended? Because history shows us it is very easy and inexpensive for some countries to get non profit status with linden lab. Probably because they don't understand, or want to understand, the non profit laws of other countries. The Canadian process appears to be the registration of Letters Patent, a form, and paying a small fee (the number $15 usd comes to mind, but i don't know for sure). In the United States, forming and qualifying a non profit corporation of the status REQUIRED by LINDEN LABS is not so easy. A formal corporation must be formed. Filing fees for a non profit corporation in Texas are $25 usd. About the same in the other states i'm licensed to practice law, so i think its a standard filing fee. But that's the easy part. The organizing documents must contain certain language, including that language i quoted about distribution of its assets. Its very easy to make mistakes and have to go back and amend the articles.

THEN you must file the application with the federal government. This is a 13 page application, with additional schedules. (form 1023 if you want to look it up). The organization must give all sorts of information to assure the federal government that the corporation is not a sham or a way for unscrupulous taxpayers to shelter income. Lots of stories about those, but that's not the point here. The point is that this is NOT a game, this is a real corporation. The IRS investigates, asks questions, sends initial findings, and hopefully, in the end, issues a determination letter that the organization is in fact, charitable, educational, etc. The process requires an initial filing fee of $300 usd (or did when we filed, it went up in january to $400) It requires the time of people with the skill to prepare the documents, who are registered with the IRS and who know the project well enough to answer the questions. The non profit arts organization i work with charges $700 usd for the filings alone. Most lawyers bill the time on an hourly basis, and it wouldn't be unusual to run fees into the thousands.

A corporation is perpetual. I can resign from VDI today, and it still goes on. I can get run over by a truck, and AA will be safe. All three of the original incorporators can step down, and the entire CSDF appointed to fill the spots. Anyone can serve as a director of VDI. Its sole mission is to explore democracy in virtual worlds. Why is that so threatening? And can CDS say the same thing about its existence, if Gwyn and Sudane are on a plane together that crashes?

Misconception 3. They don't vote in AA. They just sit around and agree and then Rose does what she wants.

if you believe this, you don't know many of the AA citizens very well. We don't conduct elections like CDS, true, but when there are issues, you better believe we get the backing of the citizens. That's why we are no longer a caliphate. The citizens voted it down. That's why we entered into a merger agreement. The citizens wanted to try representative democracy so they didn't have to talk about all the sim administration stuff. They wanted to focus on their real projects. And despite the rumor that citizens didn't get to vote on their representatives to the CDS government, the fact is that it was hard to find people who wanted to serve as reps. We could have held an election, but i asked every landowning citizen in AA if they would serve. Some of the reps that came to RA last term did not want to be there, but they did it because they love AA and they wanted to see it survive. Not that they didn't want government, AA is based on the rule of law. But the focus of most people in AA is not in in- world politics. It is in real world politics.

any more that need to be addressed?

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”