[matilda] gigspace collective related-proposal

[dougald hine]

On 10/11/05, gavin at cyber-rights.net <gavin at cyber-rights.net> wrote:
> >Also the only reason that there was an objection to the
> >ticket
> >pricing was because after the no boarders party someone said that
> >they
> >didnt think it was right for someone to have to pay to come into
> >matilda,
> >I beleive they brought it up at a monday meeting.
>
> No, it was brought up on the email list, by a few people.
> Otherwise, as I wasn't at the Monday meeting, I would have, happy
> in my ignorance, just helped put the event on as it was.
>

It was brought up at a Monday meeting, then written up badly by me in
the minutes which caused confusion, then argued over endlessly on the
list.

Sorry to add to that, but the main reason was NOT a matter of
principle about charging people to enter the building. It was that if
we sell tickets to an event, we take on a very different legal
responsibility:

1. People are no longer deemed to be entering the building 'at their
own risk' - the law regards them as having rights as a 'buyer'. This
may seem irrelevant, but if there's an accident at a gig or party it
is going to be highly relevant.

2. We bring ourselves into direct conflict with the licensing laws -
which means the nightclubs. Only by running events as a private
members club can we escape this.

Apologies again for pitching in to an over-long debate, too much of
which has been dominated by people like me who weren't actively
involved in putting on Saturday's event. (I would have said my bit at
last night's meeting, but couldn't be there as I'd been up since
4.30am.)

--
Dougald Hine
46 Alderson Road, Sheffield S2 4UD
(+44)(0)7810 650213

www.dougald.co.uk