Re: Filtering members in a forming community
From: nathan schomber (
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 21:32:43 -0800 (PST)

  Hi Rob,
  Do I need to apologize? After reading your post, I was struck with the 
realization that something I wrote in one of my posts must have offended you 
though I?m not sure what it was.(Our posts started as ?Forming group, advice?? 
then became ?Group Forming need advice?)
  I was intending to send this message to your personal email at first but then 
I thought that maybe others took offense to something as well? If in fact I was 
offensive to anyone, please know that that was not my intent. Sometimes things 
I say don?t always come out as intended, especially through this internet.
  My intentions were and still are to learn from those who have ?gone before 
us? seek your advice, learn from your experience and hopefully help create 
another community, as these alternatives to the average isolated, nuclear 
family living units are so desperately needed.
  I do highly value your advice Rob. We?ve read several of your excellent 
articles and they?re very inspiring to our group. I do however, think you?re 
misreading our group so far. 
  Rob says:
  >"In reading through all the threads my impression is that this proposal is 
just >another self reliant community notion. Not to sound dismissive, but you 
can  >check the FICReachboard and find dozens just like it."
  In my experience, most traditional Intentional Communities are against 
individual private parcel ownership. I?ve been researching a long time and so 
far haven?t found anything quite like our ideas until ironically, I came across 
rural cohousing. So far it appears that Heartwood Cohousing in Durango, Co. and 
Champlain Valley Cohousing in Charlotte, Vermont seem to be very close to what 
our group has been envisioning. We would like to learn more and possibly model 
much of our design after them.
  Rob says:
  >"In my understanding from the posts, There has been no land identified or 
>purchased, no development plan created etc. If I understand it, This is very 
early >idea phase, and without being too harsh, the reality is, most plans like 
this >crash."
  That does feel too harsh. Well, every idea has to start somewhere. We?ve 
started with weekly regular meetings and defining our vision. Now, we are 
researching legal entity options, which is why we?re hoping to learn from 
experienced folks at this site as well as other other sources. We?re very aware 
that many groups fail, but feel like its worth so much to us to and our 
families quality of life that we?ll do our best to succeed anyway
  Rob says:
  >"So frankly rather than worrying about setting up filters to keep the wrong 
people >out, I would worry about finding enough core members and financial 
support to >keep it going to the point you can actually start dealing in the 
difficult realities of  >actual communitydevelopment."
  >Rob Sandelin Sharingwood Cohousing 
  >Naturalist, Writer The Environmental Science School 
  At this point we are still gathering information and researching options 
about filters, membership and actual community development. We do have a core 
group as I?ve posted before, ?we have a committed group of 6 families (all with 
young children) and also 6 or so individuals/couples who have been meeting for 
almost 4 months now, with others wanting in. As a group, we have finances (most 
of us own our current homes) as well as access to private lending.? So it?s a 
start, right?
  As I?m sure many here can relate too, it seems everywhere we go, we fight 
negativity, stereotyping, and folks discounting, but we?re still determined and 
committed to making it a reality. We welcome any feedback. 
  Peace to You-
  Nathan & Sarah
  ?unnamed group?
  Asheville, NC

TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.