I do not consent to this dismissal and would request that we escalate this to an in-person discussion.

Hey @Benjamin Langholz, sure. There are 2 processes for how to deal with disagreements/conflict (see the advice process thread).

• conflict escalation process: this is ideal when it concerns a 1:1 conflict/disagreement. I am happy to go through this with you. We are already in touch through FB messenger. Let's continue there?

• Open call for a meeting for consent: ideal when there is a disagreement/conflict between multiple people. This seems more fitting for this proposal. In my eyes, in practice, we already went through this once when you came to the dreams meetup and we explored some form of consensus. However, again happy to do this (albeit better through hangouts/online given corona).

How would you like to proceed?

To be clear: the advice process clearly stipulates (point 6): "Event realizers that are (strongly) affected by your decision must consent to go through with the PROPOSAL.". As is clear: several Dream realizers do not consent at the moment with the proposal as it currently stands, effectively blocking this proposal from being put into action.

Hei Benjamin,

I wish to reply to you on behalf of the dream team. Some members have already made their individual statements.
This is also a post answering to @Alexxx who wishes to see how dreams are affected.
Please be aware that this statement is a compiled collection of individual dream team members points.

Bottomline: The dream team as a whole would not block the art department but it would also not be happy with the art department happening in its' current proposed form.
The dream team as a whole cannot foresee the consequences for dreams other than that they won't be positive. Individual dream team members do not consent to the idea of the art department and would leave the dream team most likely. Some dream team members are yet unsure about that. One possible consequence of the art department happening is the dream team imploding with a variety of possible consequences for the dream project.

We would adivce for the art department to planned for 2021. Either in conjunction with dreams or replacing dreams entirely. Either in conjunction with Alex' proposal for a changed approach or in conjunction with other ticket proposals. There are also dream team members who would support the fleshing out of such an art department in fall 2020 so the time-aspects of bringing big art can be addressed in 2021.

• How dreams are affected

  • Depending on the amount of money that is going from dreams to arts and from dreams to infrastructure this year, the result might be crippling for dreams platform.

  • It takes away worth of the tokens and hence taking away decision power from the individual Kiez Burner in order to give it into the hands of the proposer of the art department and his two chosen assistants

  • While this doesn't make the dreams platform obsolete necessarily, it diminishes the contribution of dreams and the value of the dreams project in total. Some dream realizers do not consent to this (subsequently dropping out) and some dream realizers are simply 'not happy' with this idea, but would not block it

• Direct and tangible consequences for dreams and dream team if the art department goes forward

  • Realizers will drop out

    • Depending on the number of realizers who drop out this might render the dream team too small to function currently

  • If dreams are still running: We will remove the bias towards big arts and installations and move it towards the other categories as arts and installations already get a guaranteed bigger chunk

    • Currently, big arts and installations get prioritized exposition @ dreams and leftover tokens will go to installations and arts happening on 'Deep Playa / Dreamland' space. That will go away.

    • The 'additional chunk of money' to support ART & installations can either come from the art department (benefitting 1-3 art projects max) or from the changes made to the dreams process (benefitting all dreams registering as 'ART & installations)

  • We will have to rework our manual in order to avoid double funding. Double funding was a huge point of complaining last year for infrastructure. Double funding via both routes (and getting a double advantage) was to be avoided this year as an explicit goal of the dreams process

  • We will have to inform dreamers about the changes and deal with the responses

• Individual Philosophical / Principle-based arguments (and maybe also opinions and be taken as such...)

  • Art department can do all the things or none of the things. Realizer of art department doesn't get to choose to only spend time with his eyeball and leave the rest for the dream-team (accountability / responsibility)

  • The dream team can fulfill the tasks of the art department but the art department is not willing to take on tasks of the dream team. There is accountability the one way around but not vice versa.
    If the dream team steps down, everybody can enjoy their one - three big art piece and nothing else funded by Kiez Burn.

  • Going back to a centralized art department without having explored the option of changing the dreams process makes progress in this regards almost impossible and feels like giving up after a year of not even trying to make it better. Dreams do not get a shot at growing and getting better

  • The dreams department was making several suggestions on how to combine art department and Dreams Platform (f.e. making the art department a dream itself. Making the art department a self-fund / crowdfund thing with PR and communication help by the dream team/ etc. etc.) Until now these advices/proposals have been rejected. The argument was that the proposer of the art department is not interested in the process & actually sees it as a hindrance for ARTISTS doing capital ART, and doesn't want to partake in anything that stands in the way of doing art.

My ultimate goal is to ensure that there is art at Kezburn I joined the dreams platform because of this, and to pull the balance of funding away from Kieze decorations and parties to actual art. To ensure a full and vibrant art playa/platform/hill.

So as that plan goes there WILL be art of Kiezburn this year. Goal achieved. Now to see if it works.

I initially supported the idea of an art department - I think the big art idea has merit - but I think it failed to materialise because there was no timely decision made. This is one of Kiezburn's failings: we talk too much aboout ideas that go nowhere becaue we take too long to come to a consensus. I also think a lot of stalling and "filibustering" goes on in some cases, but that's just me :)

On the con side, I wonder: does Kiezburn have the scale to support such big art projects? We are only 1000 people after all.

I disagree with the "behind closed doors" argument - there's no reason why it should be behind closed doors JUST because it was in the past. Using dreams means that it's open to all. All we need now are some big ideas now that the community can vote on. And that won't be disguised as some "arty" dancefloor or sex-tent in the back end of someone's Kiez.

Here is my very clear statement in one sentence: I do not consent to this dismissal and would request that we escalate this to an in person discussion.

To attempt a longer winded explanation:

While your answer is more verbose it has only made things less clear to me. I would request and challenge you to summarize what you are trying to say in one sentence.

I can understand from your post that in your mind the ART Department will not be going forward. What I do not understand is the why.

If I assume you are saying essentially the ART department will not be going forward. This message was particularly surprising as it is opposite to what I was being told during the leads meeting from several other board and event coordination team members.

One thing has been made clear over the past month (wow this has thread is over a month old!) I do not natively speak the language of KiezBurn organization. This post makes me feel my desire to contribute to KiezBurn is being dismissed for in some way not following “the process” (Although as far as I understood the process was on hold until just a few days ago? And as far as I can understand it I was) or being natively fluent in this language.

To be quite honest you may have won. Because of this strange and drawn out situation at this point I do not think I will continue to desire to contribute to KiezBurn as I am feeling less and less that my energy and contribution is desired by the KiezBurn org and specifically yourself Waldo. I will likely still choose to attend but in a consumption only basis.

I'd actually prefer the short-form version as I am still unclear what you are actually saying. Just that you are saying more.

Okay, going to write it out longform :)

The Problem that was addressed in this proposal was that bigger art needs more guidance, earlier timing & funding. The Dreams Team already had these problems in focus and wanted to address these, which we hope & believe to have done in the Dreams Platform 2020.

Process

• we explored a consensus between the Dream Team and Benjamin how an art department could fit into how Dreams works. I regret that this was not successful, despite a great willingness from the side of the Dream Team to come to a consensus and incorporate the art committee idea. @Alexxx below the screenshot of where it is linked:
  

• Since everyone agreed that we should have a Dreams Platform again (including Benjamin), we set out to launch this platform.

• The advice process was closed and we are set to launch today.

Separate Art from Dreams

The key issue seems to be that Benjamin sees this proposal only succeeding if this is separate from the Dreams Platform. Besides the several principled objections to the format and decision-making process of the suggested art department, it also is hard to conceive a Dreams Platform to be successful in parallel to an art grant committee that does not operate through Dreams:

• Dreams being funded on top of what they are allocated on Dreams, goes against the whole philosophy of Dreams. It was also a major learning of last year that we should not have external funding pop-up on Dreams after granters gave their tokens (see infrastructure projects last year). Granters should have full transparency on the actual funding needs of a project and this should not be tampered with.
  ==> As one of the Dream Realizers I do not consent to "double funding"

• Alternatively, artists/dreamers have to choose between an art department or the Dreams platform when they want to submit an art application. Although do-able, this increases the insecurity for Dreamers and further complicates the process.
  ==> I do not "not consent" to this, but would heavily advise against this system. It will also require a large degree of alignment between said art department and the Dreams team (no double funding)

Going forward

I see four options:

1. Either an art grant committee or a Dreams Platform, responsible for all Dreams/art/... (there is no point in Dreams without art)

2. An art committee that decides on fund allocation after Dream voting ends (see Borderland, principled objections remain regarding format & decision-making process of this art committee)

3. After launch of the Dreams platform, and before voting, an art committee decides on fund allocation to certain artworks. However, as stated by Benjamin before, he does not deem the Dreams platform to be working for his proposal. Principled objections remain regarding format & decision-making process of this art committee.

4. We organize a big fun party with the Dream/Art grant money instead!

I am also unsure of the implications of this post. You have not come to consensus within the Dreams Team with this art committe? Does that mean that you (as individuals or Team) are not consenting to the proposal?

I also see no reference in the Dreams advice process thread you linked to this proposal. Nor do understand how the Dreams Platform is influenced in any way, other than receiving less money as proposed. Operationally everything can remain the same, just eh numbers change.

Finally, if the above statement is true. Who are the affected parties of this proposal that can remove consent? The Dreams Team wouldn't have to do more/less work in response to this proposal that I can see, so they may be effected, but not affected.

Please correct me if I am missing something here.

It's also a bit unclear to me what you're saying here @waldo. Are you announcing that this proposal has failed based on what happened in another proposal?

I don’t exactly understand what you’re saying here aside from the focusing of Dreams on art and performance. Can you please clarify?

Hey, @Jeff Spirlock - you might be interested to hear that dreams this year will exclude Kieze / Camp funding & infrastructure funding and also tweak the bias towards art & installation. :)

we will discuss this, and more, on the 4th of March during the Dreams kick-off meeting: https://talk.kiezburn.org/d/OceFnITD/kickstart-dreams-2020

No Paul, I did not. I said “ I thought your post was not very nice or cooperative“ in response to you specifically asking what was with the emojis, which was driven by you ending your post with “If you want to fo it, I'll send you the full list and you can knock yourself out!”. Now you seem to have some personal vendetta against me and your dragging that into a completely different thread, interrogating me about why I have an interest in this, and apparently trying to trap me in some logical fallacy, but instead you’re just wasting everyone’s time. I stand by what I said, here and there. I’m not engaging in this nonsense anymore because it’s not productive.

the question remains: who exactly is the art department

@Karlo Walz I would also prefer to have the ART Department be run by someone in KiezBurn Org (Is there a KiezBurn org?). But since last year I discovered the system KiezBurn decided to use to fund artwork (Dreams) was not something I as an artist would participate in. I decided that this year, instead of creating artwork for KiezBurn I would take that energy and invest it into helping to create a system I would want to use and enable other artists to create ART.

When seeing the "Do-ocracy" stance of KiezBurn organizational style I thought this was a great way to contribute my energy.

One this I would say is that I think the current system was put in place without consulting enough, or thinking in the best interests of the artist who make ART. So I think I can represent that interest very well in the creation of the system.

Of course, the selection process will be subjective. ART is subjective. But it will be the combined subjectivity of the members of the ART Department and not mine alone.

No one, including myself, is obligated to make proposals, add input, justify their interests or opinions, nor respond to incessant interrogation by others.

@CJ Yetman
That thread contains no input from you. As it stands, you have made no proposals.

The thread DOES contain the line:
For example, last year's Dreams process had the following implications:

• we did not see a lot of big art funded due to the inherent structure of Dreams
  

... which would indicate that making it a part of Dreams would not be a wise move.

Again - you are trying to be a part of a process you do not believe in and want to fail. This is a conflict of interest. I have no problem with you joining the board, but I'd argue that people who are at least enthusiastic about the idea should be prioritised.
They don't have to be experts, or artists, just enthusiastic.

There's a thread about setting up the Dreams platform here if you're interested in that... https://talk.kiezburn.org/d/XHhwWky3/setting-up-dreams-platform-process

If you want to single-handedly distribute the entire kiez burn art budget, you should!

@Vlad This isn't management science,, this is a do-ocracy. No one has to be an expert in anything to join a board with Kiezburn. You know this.

@Paul aka Khromo in Management science it is called expert group decision making. If those people are not experts, it is even worse.

The Dream-Team has listened to the input from the community and taken a strong focus towards art installations and performances (away from Kieze & infrastructure). We hope & believe this will address the key concerns regarding big art in terms of timing, funding and guidance. See implementation here.

We regret we were not able to come to a consensus with this art committee proposal during the advice process of the Dreams platform. It is hard to conceive a Dreams Platform to be successful in parallel to an art grant committee that does not operate through Dreams. For the future, it might be interesting to evaluate what comes out of the experiment Borderland is ran last & this year of having an open committee fund certain bigger art projects on the Dreams Platform.

oops, pressed the wrong button a couple of times. moved now.

Update

We are hitting play again on the advice process

We had our "How we work together" meeting on Saturday March 6th and agreed on an iterated version for the advice process. Everyone currently affected by the pause please read through the iterated process and continue with the updated version of the advice process. All the details you find over here.

https://talk.kiezburn.org/advice-processes/

After reviewing the 2019 Dreams platform (dreams.2019.kiezburn.org) it is pretty clear to me why there was not a mass amount of art on the playa last year. Many of these dreams are related to camp infrastructure. Which is pretty insane to me. I'm all for helping people bring their art but if you don't own a sound system I don't feel like Dreams should be used to bring some massive booming sound system. If your camp isn't 80-90% funded then you shouldn't be draining funds from Dreams to build your camp. Infrastructure is NOT a Dream from my point of view, it is a necessity to functionality. That includes camp infrastructure or event infrastructure. These should be separate budgets.

@CJ Yetman I know that. And I agree with you. But YOU told me I was coming across as hostile because I was not making proposals in a different thread, did you not?

At this point, we're going around in circles and you're contradicting yourself and frankly,YOU are coming actross as hostile and obstructionist, and I'm not sure if that is your intention.

Best we continue this in person and not virtually, I think.

I see this process in steps:
a) decision of an art department (to get some expensive art which will get money a bit in advance on our playa)
b) decision on the amount (see above.. my vision is 50% of the art grant for 2 projects)
c) setup of the art department with people
1 art dep head (should be from Kiezburn) and 2 teams.. one for each project...
I would like to have as head not an artist as this will lead to bias of artwork and maybe people.
I would prefer to have someone from Kiezburn org.
The question is how is the process of finding this decision?

Then why not join the dreams boart instead?
How would you improve the platform? What do you see as the flaws?

I don't mind the dreams platform, but I see as reeking of the democracy people love to hate in burner cultrue (it's vote-based and popularity wins out over merit, as people vote for their friends).~
That said, I'd be opposed to getting rid of it totally if the suggestion arose.

@Vlad -the dreams platform is still open and joining the art group is open to everyone - so not just experts.

@Karlo Walz Apologies :)

Paul and others.. Can you please avoid sarcasm or ironic or words not translatable..
This is not radical inclusion anymore.. and native english speaker plays there advatages in full!

My preferred alternate solution would be to use and improve the Dreams platform, which I have suggested more than once in the thread above.

Fair enough. I'd still see it as a conflict of interests though.

But a wise man once told me that, in order to avoid coming across as hostile, one should present alternative solutions :)

No, as I said, I hope that it does not go through, because I don't believe it's the best way to allocate substantial amounts of money. However, if it is to be, I would like to be included in the decision making process rather than excluded.

he interest you have expressed is in hoping it does not go through and suggesting it be stripper to the bear minimum. Frankly, id prefer to see people who are at least passionate about the idea to take the roles.

Regardless, can you state that you now wish to see it go through with adequate funding?

Expressing interest in participating in a process that one does not believe is the best way of handling something is not hostile, at least not as much as insisting that one justify their interest to you.

I think it's an important decision, so I'd like to be a part of it.

Doesn't answer the question, which was: why would you want to.

To say you don't like an idea, then to say you hope it doesn't go through and then suddenly to want to a part of it is inconsistent. To then dodge a simple request for clarification makes you sound hostile.

my opinions are as valid as yours or anyone else's

Why would you want to participate in a department you don't agree with? This is as much a conflict of interests as having Benjamin on it, something you were staunchly against.

@CJ Yetman glad to hear! Although are you sure you'd like to contribute so much energy to something you are expressing at the moment you disapprove of? Joining an initiative out of spite doesn't sound so nice. If you're in to enable artists I'd love to have you! As I said I'm not making a selection it will be first come first serve as soon as it's clear that the ART Department can move forward. Sounds like you'll be first in line and I would be happy to have your energy on this =)

I sincerely hope this proposal does not go through, but if it does, I would like to be a member of this important decision making body. @Benjamin Langholz when will you announce who you have selected to be on the board?

@Karlo Walz I will not choose the members of the ART Department. I would only make a few requests in order to keep the process efficient which is necessary for my interest in contributing my energy to organize it.

• No more then 3 members per project we hope to fund. If we have a budget for 2 projects that's a total of a maximum of 6 members in the ART Department.

• Anyone can join the ART Department. But I ask that they commit to the entire process. So if they would like to contribute in selecting the artworks that receive a grant I also ask that they support that project up until it is installed, and stay on playa with it until it makes it's way elsewhere during the strike. I ask this to avoid a full room during selection which is obviously fun and low commitment and then be left by myself supporting the artworks. I also think having a commitment involved with the selection of artwork will make people consider their selection in a meaningful way.

• In order to not have a bias whoever would like to join the ART Department is welcome to contact me as soon as it is clear that the ART Department is moving forward and it will be first come first serve up to the number of people mentioned above plus I guess a waitlist if there is too much interest.

However, so far no one has told me they would like to be involved. So hopefully there is interest as I would like help in the process.

I hope that clarifies!

Benjamin if I read your statement I am concerned that annart department might be the friendly take over of kiezburn from you and your friends. I think this should not be you who decides not to invite somebody into this art department „bexause of efficiency“. It might be that my not so good english gives me a wrong impression of your statement above!! I am unsure.

Can you explain me what is the plan at that very point?

please do not use complicate sentenced and words to hide anything and keep it simple and understandable! I write especially as I see a lot if pistongs here which do not match what I see as easy!

@Paul aka Khromo to say again and clarify my plan for transparency is to have video available of the meetings that anyone can view. However I am not inviting anyone to participate in the ART Department. I’m inviting anyone to participate ART Department if they are interested in commuting to participating fully (See my post above). Also limiting the total number of participants for efficiency.

Dear @Benjamin Langholz thank you for your further work on this. I am not very clear on your proposal. To be able to say YES or NO I need the following information (this should also sit in the first post on top, where all relevant points are collected)

• How will ART DEPARTMENT work? How many people, how are they elected? Who ensures this happens if the vote is YES?

• Please define "3-5 projects at 50%"? My understanding is that this did happen last year - it's just dancefloors and camp spaces and eco toilets were also dreams/art :) Please define ART and the X budget of which 50% would be funded clearly, so we can make a difference. Remember the information on Talk should be clear so that any new person entering the thread would get it from the get-go

Thank you for pushing ART - we support and <3 you!

@Paul aka Khromo what is being proposed?

I chatted quite a lot with Benjamin, yesterday. In my opinion it is exactly what is being proposed. Benjamin + maximum two people will pick 2 big projects and dump the entire art grant budget we had last year.

Vlad - again - going 'back to the roots of expert groups deciding for all' is NOT what's being proposed.

@Benjamin Langholz Here is a description of the advice process you should be following https://talk.kiezburn.org/d/IjSQFmf0/the-advice-process

also, you should probably read https://talk.kiezburn.org/d/N8qcmdSi/philosophy-culture

it, for instance, says "Kiez Burn is not a democracy. Voting isn’t the purpose of all these processes, collective intelligence is." and "Kiez Burn seeks to run more on advice processes as well (and not voting)."

@Vlad

did you ask big theme camps if they can and want to participate in kiezburn with 30% less support? 

I think this is a great point! I'd love to hear more from the theme camp organizers. I believe they are invited to participate here? If you can give me some names I'd love to directly invite them to contribute to this poll. Or maybe just @ mention them? I'd also love to hear more from artists =)

that is an indicator which is much more powerful than 18 votes on talk.

As I understood previously polling on Talk was the process and that there was no hierarchy in the decision making.

@Benjamin Langholz did you ask big theme camps if they can and want to participate in kiezburn with 30% less support? People say they want more art, but they clearly allocated only about 35% of dream money into art projects, that is an indicator which is much more powerful than 18 votes on talk.

@Paul aka Khromo I agree on all dream critics, hell, i was the main dream critics and abuser last year. Improving dream platform is in my opinion is a better way forward, rather then to go back to the roots of expert groups deciding for all of us what we want.

If you see the distribution of funds within dreams which Waldo submitted, an actual share of art projects was around 5.5k, the rest went to support theme camps and other non installation based activities. If the distribution stay the way it was 2019, the entire "art" grant budget is consumed.

Of course there is a bug discussion about whether the distribution was right, but this is the discussion we should start instead of moving the art grant money out of dreams into private hands.

@Alexxx and @Vlad this post by waldo was distributed how the community distributed the tokens in Dreams not an allocation of funds to different areas. This process would still happen, just with less total funds since a certain percentage would go to the ART department to distribute.

@Vlad , there was ~15k€ spent last year on Dreams. Benjamins calculations here are correct. 5ke would only take about 30% of the art budget, if we have the same numbers as last year.

Waldo gave a distribution of dream money. If the distribution is kept between kieze, Workshop und Art, then there will be no more other art projects except the 2 projects the art department picks. I will to dream guides and we will ask everybody who has submitted an art project last year if they support this system.

@Vlad I don’t understand what you mean? Assuming the numbers of last year that would leave 10,000 for Dreams. Which is a considerable amount to fund many additional projects outside those selected by the ART Department.

Unless I’m missing your point?

The question of the poll is very questionable and does not give a perspective of what really happening.

5k is a third of all dream budget. Considering the system will work as last year there will be no funds for any project outside of the art department.

What I hear: we will have two art projects at kiez burn this year and art department will be the only authority to decide what it should be!

@Alexxx
Whoa, I completely did not intend to make it seem with the post about the Facebook post that I was attacking an individual. In fact, I found their support to be the most direct support I've received. I actually just meant to point out that I had tried to continue the process as I understood it, by moving onto the next steps of making the proposal happen and make it clear I have been trying to make progress. I removed the name of the person pleas please reread it and if you feel it's still an attack I would rather delete it then have that effect.

means that you need to seek the advice of experts and affected parties, and take all of that into consideration BEFORE making the decision to go ahead.

Absolutely! I have asked several times to different people who to talk to about it but other then money it wasn't clear. I attended the Dreams Guide meeting last night as that was pointed out as a group of experts who would be effected my proposal.

As finance lead and Schatzmeister of the e.V, and therefor the individual who actually helps to define the budget, and move the money,

In my original proposal, I was more interested if there was interest in the process I was proposing. I made it clear I was flexible with the amount of money. But you're right we should have spoken sooner! You'll notice numbers-wise that I am following directly the advice contributed in this thread (in a screenshot since I can't link to your vote). The intention of this poll is to get a better idea of what kind of funding the community thinks the ART Department should be responsible for. We definitely need to talk more about it =)

but you being blocked is because we are not far enough in the event organization process in order to for your proposal to get fully approved or denied. There is no event coordination team to guide this whole process, we do not have a confirmation of the gelände or the budget yet

Thank you! this is super clarifying! So the event coordination team is needed to make this go forward? What's the next steps on forming that?

30 votes on Talk (not all of which are in favor) is NOT confirmation that a much larger community shares your vision in it's entirety. Too many people are affected by this decision for you to assume approval on such a small input.

I totally agree here! I was just following the process as I understood it with the tools that I was told were used to follow that process. I absolutely agree that in a Facebook group for 4000 people and an event of 800 having 30 people's options is not enough. I posted several times on Facebook trying to rally people to the thread. Do you have any thoughts on how we can increase participation?

Thanks for this! Overall this has been the most clarifying and direct communication. I have been becoming more frustrated by the lack of clarity in the process. To say it's not time yet is super reasonable! It's also reasonable to say there is a specific group of people who need to approve the proposal. So as I understand it now I should wait until the event coordination team is formed and they will then decide if an ART Department will go forward? Is it still valuable to run this poll to see what the community thinks in terms of funding? Or should I close it?

The reason I am interested in moving forward as quickly as we can is that the longer we wait to reach out to try and find artists the less effective the ART Department can be in soliciting larger scale more involved art. Art takes time. For Burning Man just as a point of reference, the event ends in Septemeber and the art grants process starts in October.

It seems the process here has been kind of out of order. Starting location scouting and dreams guide planning before there is an event coordination team. Shouldn't they be involved in those aspects as well?

@Benjamin Langholz I am not fully in the loop, as I am busy dealing with the actual ins-and-outs of the KB Finanance, including an oncoming Finanzamt check.

For clarity, the consensual do-ocracy process, as far as I understood it, means that you need to seek the advice of experts and affected parties, and take all of that into consideration BEFORE making the decision to go ahead.

As finance lead and Schatzmeister of the e.V, and therefor the individual who actually helps to define the budget, and move the money, as well as deal with the tax implications and the finanzamt as the result of such a proposal, I was NOT approached, or directly spoken to in any detail whatsoever. As such, it is a definitive, and binary sign that you did not fully follow the advice process to any extent required to make public statements of approval. We're not talking about rearranging 150€ here or there, we're talking about almost a quarter of the entire budget in your initial proposal, that definitely requires at the very least an exchange of thoughts from both of us directly.

That is absolutely fine that that happens, we are all practicing and therefor learning this consensual doocracy process, it is far from perfect, and I love the proposal and am open to the discussion, but to publicly post on Facebook that the "Art Departments has been approved!" without us having any direct exchange on the topic seems a little premature in my opinion. And then to come on here in what 'appears at a glance' to be a soft attack against a specific individual who has been trying her utmost hardest to support and enable your proposal, in spite of all of the challenges we're facing with refining this process, seems rather unfair.

It appears as though you didn't get what you want, within the time-frame that you wanted it, and now you're lashing out.Please note, that your revised proposal is a vast improvement, but you being blocked is because we are not far enough in the event organization process in order to for your proposal to get fully approved or denied. There is no event coordination team to guide this whole process, we do not have a confirmation of the gelände or the budget yet. Not to mention, your proposal denies about 50 individuals/groups their opportunity to make a dream come true. 30 votes on Talk (not all of which are in favor) is NOT confirmation that a much larger community shares your vision in it's entirety. Too many people are affected by this decision for you to assume approval on such a small input.

What this means is that I request that you remain patient, understand that the people who you feel are 'blocking' you are also volunteers who are trying their hardest to do the right thing, and facing multiple challenges simultaneously, in service to this community and event.

Be patient, we're all learning, and no one here is power-hungry. Try and think, "why could this be happening? There is no financial gain to be made by anyone (except your artists in this case), so perhaps there is other valid reasoning behind the slow-movement of the proposal (some of which I have highlighted above).

Don't stop dreaming brother, I do not mean this as an attack by any means, and if it comes across as such, please excuse my lack of skill with digital communications. I want you to be supported, you just bit off a chunk of the event that cannot be changed so quickly. Too many people are affected by it. (just like with the Ticketing...)

I'd like to just publicly post here and say that I have very little to no clarity on how to proceed with this proposal. I feel I have followed the procedure as I understand it but have been receiving pushback and delay.

Also for transparency, I attempted to post in the "KiezBurn" Facebook group to build momentum towards making the ART department but the post has sat unapproved since Feb 1. This is not an oversite but intentional as was explained to me over the phone. But it was said it would be resolved last weekend. I don't know what to think of this exactly I just think that everyone interested in the proposal (for or against) should know.

Some questions came up during the dreams guide meeting in terms of integrating feedback clearly:

Transparency: Every meeting will be video live streamed so that anyone can observe.

The team that is The ART Department: Anyone can join on one condition with a limit of total of 3 people (first come first serve (first to send me a message saying they would like to help once this proposal is let to go forward by......?) per number of projects we have funds to support. Only condition is that they commit from beginning to end. Meaning from the beginning, creation of the call out, selection of artworks, to helping the project deinstall, and make it's way off playa, and everything in between.

Amount of funds: It was suggested that I make clear an amount to proceed with standby for another poll.

This is soooooooo amazing!!! Thank you Ben for doing all this, it's long overdue. With every word you've written, you spoke from my heart. I couldn't agree more.

Hey Ben!
There was very little left over funds from last year. Maybe @Alexxx can weigh more in on that.
It's amazing to see how much support this initiative is getting. This department requires additional budget to be raised since its more money than last year, so Kiez Burn has to do that first. You could getting involved in location, budget and ticketing team... which haven't been defined yet. So youre one step ahead of everyone! I'm not familiar with core event pieces and the sequence things need to happen in but security, toilets, fire, first aid are just a few of the event critical pieces that need to be put in place before 'leisure' budget can be allocated. Board is meeting tomorrow, so we can guide you a little better about next steps and who to speak with.

Busy past few days! Very excited to see that the poll came with a great amount of support in favor of this proposal. I'll begin drafting up the call for artworks and taking the feedback into consideration in the post, explore a way forward.

I must say I'm a bit uncertain in the procedural next steps but at this point, I would like to get a better sense of who would like to be involved, I would like to assemble the ART Department from a core of no more than 10 people (we're only talking about funding 3 or fewer projects at this point) who are interested in the selection process, supporting a project both in the months leading up to KB, on the ground during build, during the event, strike, and event aftercare. If you're interested in involvement at this level lets start talking now! 

In terms of the timeline, I would like to put out the open call no later than a week from now and have the projects selected by the end of February, so that artists can get started!

I would love to chat more with someone who has a clearer picture of available funds. I understood there were leftover funds from last year and I'd like to find the right combination of using these and upcoming ticket sale funds to go towards these projects.

Looks like we're heading towards having ART!

Yes I agree that it would not be appropriate for those in the art department to be recipients of the grants. Very logical. I will not be bringing any artwork that I create.

I would like to say that I very, very, very strongly object to anyone on this art department being allowed to submit an art project or be associated with a submitted project. So @Benjamin Langholz , if you plan to submit an art project, please do not appoint yourself to this role.

I voted "agree" because I would love to have more Art at KB. And I believe that an Art Departement that curates 2-3 Pieces could be a good way to try out. We could probably also change parameters on the dreams platform to get there... But lets do something for more Art!

Hei @Vlad - if you find the time to joing the dream guides meeting at the 11th I would love to see you bring this up. Also, please, put this in the dreams process thread you can find here:

https://talk.kiezburn.org/d/XHhwWky3/setting-up-dreams-platform-process

I have an idea: last year i did not have time to promote my art (neither to build) and it was extremely annoying that i needed to spend so much time on the promotion part. I still think it is important that the community vote for projects, but to make artists life a bit easier we my establish an art help union. This group of volunteers will help artist with his dream (promotion/voting/budget) and thus make the process a little bit easier.

What do you thjink guys, doe sit make sense to set up something like this?

Check site planning thread for map. Space for big art is there by our last planning on fictive map (in the playa

Would def love to see more art Kiez Burn! I think this an amazing initiative. For such large pieces we'd need to co-ordinate with site planning to make sure we have have the space and requirements for such big pieces. We could check when site planning and camp mapping was finalised last year also!

and all the information that was used to guide that decision is in that thread... so, totally transparent

@Karlo Walz There was a decision made by a select group of people, but this decision was not made behind the curtains. We made a lot of effort in finding a good solution last year on a difficult topic.

If I remember correctly there has been also a behind the curtain decision about the funding percentages and adding one at the end as someone wants this very much.

I do have you confused! So sorry :)

Well, @Benjamin Langholz I love your enthusiasm for art. I believe we can find a consensus that works, where both the process-people and the art-people will be happy about :) Let's find it :)

@Benjamin Langholz it's fair that you're "less concerned with distributing happiness" and more concerned with getting more art at KB, but please be cognisant of the fact that many of us here are very much concerned about there being an overall "happiness" with the process by which large sums of money are distributed to individuals.

Thanks Benjamin for the detailed response. We did in fact meet several times. I was involved in funding & placement of your discobooth several years and taking up the connect you made to the Dutch burners that brought big art to Kiez Burn
-As I said we haven’t met. You have me confused with someone else.

One last comment on something you wrote in a later comment "it's impossible to make everyone happy". What we found and has been our goal, is not to make everyone happy with the funding they receive, but the target rather was to have most people be happy with the process. From the experience of the past 3 years, clear rules & more transparency, has been key in getting to that point.
-I am less concerned with distributing happiness and instead concerned with making sure it is possible to have Art at KiezBurn. Again I don’t attend any burn based on it’s style of organization.

Thanks for the details I will go over them later when I have more time.

I believe I am confused about the purpose of this system and making proposals publicly to be voted on by the members of the community. But we shall see.

@Benjamin Langholz I am waiting to read the post-mortem from @Remy Schneider documented by @Veroca R. Sala that is due any minute. I think understanding what happened last year (our first year of Dreams) is important for moving forward.

I am grateful to you we are starting this conversation sooner than later! I know that convo has been happening in the background already, too.

Another thing: you could choose to familiarise yourself with the Advice Process (you probably need a combination of running through Talk threads and some guidance by @waldo (?)).

This process allows you to radically propose a new way of doing while gathering community sentiment + expert advice and to take YOUR decision accordingly. That is one of the bonuses of (not easy but awesome) Radical Do-ocracy ;)

After reading more I would like to share my experience with Kiez Burn dream with my art work I created last year for the platform playa.
I full agree with Benj on that artist has to cover all costs in advance but even more if you request a very small and fair coverage taking into account that you can use the materials after the burn for something else and therefore request only 1/3 and then finally you got the message that for this small amount you get only 50% results in something between 10 - 20 % which means I have to cover all things with 80% plus transport and so on..
There was absolutely no support from Kiezburn on the whole process but more question on concerns.. No one askes supporting transportation or volonteering to build up.. or strike or cable for power and so on..
The overall process to establish a bigger art is more in the area of the biggest soundcamp..
If we establish ourselfes as a huge raverparty then of course dreams will never come true.
I see this department process as a kick off to move the direction into more art.. more communical work on art and more establish such a process.
Finally this does not need to be behind hidden curtains but we can have a dreams platform for huge art.. (everyone can chose one) and medium size and small art..
The biggest concern is indeed time. If you plan something bigger you just need much more time.. half a year minumum, one week to build on location maybe even longer..getting funds in portions from time to time and also getting support in building, designing, drawing and so on..

Let me take the other-sided viewpoint, and say: The more sustainable and useful infrastructure we get funded at Kiezburn, the greater Kiezburn will feel for a majority of the participants. Therefore I think it is paramount that people are able to vote on the dreams platform if they want large chunks of their money to go to not-so-purposeful or very purposeful art, or if they prefer some other way that their money is spent to make Kiezburn better on a practical level.

1) If that is a possibility that would be great! I have no preference in where the money comes from. To move it from Dreams just seems like the most obvious actionable possibility. The more money going to make KB great the better!

1) This seems like a mostly funding-related topic. Perhaps transferring the motivation of creating larger scale art projects can simply be directed towards creating funding designated for this kind of project instead of getting most of it from the current dreams funding?

2) The issue involving community involvement in higher funded art can possibly be resolved in creating a tier system in the dreams platform? Assuming the necessary funding for expensive art is found, maybe leaving the dreams tokening system for the already funded dreams be contrasted with another token (ingots?) that each person can also use to vote for a higher tier of separately funded art?

3) The concept of anarchy in relation to the word "Burn" seems to me like a confusing topic. As BM has been burning for over 3 decades, I find it just as difficult to refer to its principles and its practices like a singular entity as it is to refer to a person throughout their lifetime. I, for example, can't say that I practice the same values that I used to uphold 30 years ago even if I were to claim to. Although Burning Man still is called Burning Man and it is currently entitled with this name (now legally), it barely resembles the anarchistic spirit it used to uphold. I'm curious if anyone wants to open a discussion on whether this vague concept is applicable to 'stealing' the title "Burn" from an institution that may or may not possess multiple faces throughout its lifetime. Any of the burners from 20 years ago that I heard abandoning BM due to the loss of its own values could perhaps chime in. The thought of them piggybacking off of BM to create a better version elsewhere is perhaps ironic. I personally feel that using the term "Burn" in honour of its principles (present or previous) to not necessarily coincide with the principles of Burning Man, at least not legally. Hopefully we don't get sued.

@Alina, also known as Milda! Not none, and not only Karlo. I also built a university on the art playa. :)

I'm happy to have a chat about art at Kiezburn. Where our opinion differs though is more in democracy than in art, I feel. By the way, we have a quite unexpected common friend, Benjamin!

Very impressive, summing a total of 39k€.
Over half the entire KB Budget. And twice what we invested in Dreams last year.

We*re playing a different ball game on this side of the pond my friend. Your big numbers just make me think of all the extra medics, fire extinguishers, tools, lighting and toilets we needed last year.

But my focus lies with operations. I'm exited you're taking this on, and will support as best as I can.

@Karlo Walz - yes I remember, and that was the only piece of art on our "Art Playa", apart from the Effigy that did look pretty badass and could of course qualify as art too. I also remember it was a battle for you to get it funded/supported. I am very happy you did it anyways! <3

Alina, I created some art.. this was not "none"

@David I'm mostly in agreement with you, however I'd say there is validity in the process of curation. One of the benefits of having a pre-selection of dreams for voting on the platform (the process I served as an example earlier) is that a committee of people would have an eagle-eye view on the whole and would be able to preselect a good variety of art offerings so that we don't end up with 5 sound systems, camp's spaces and no art like last year.

I think our ideas about art and why it should be created are so different that we should definitely get together and discuss in person sometime soon. I'm curious to see where it goes.

If you want to talk money...

For the project I created for BM this year I:
-Was awarded a grant from BM for $20,000

-Crowdfunded $9,000 myself over months of effort

-Sold an installation and contributed $5,000 of that sale to this project

-Contributed $5000 out of my pocket

-Contributed thousands of hours staring in 11 months prior to Burning Man (many of these hours alongside @Amihay Gonen ).

-Had a team of up to 25 people many of which generously contributed in a professional capacity at a full-time quantity for at least a few weeks. None of these people were paid they all volunteered.

All to present in the desert for a 1-week experimental temporary community to enjoy.

This was my 5th large scale artwork I have contributed to a burn.

This was a monumental effort in many ways. I would love to inspire even a seed of inspiring this kind of effort to contribute to KB. Art, especially big art inspires huge meaningful contributions and communal efforts from the burner community.

That's totally fine. And I value artists who do not bend to that.

If you don't bend to it (or see the value of going this route), then your other routes are

1. Do art without budget

2. Find donors

3. Find sponsors

4. Corruption

5. And probably a few other creative routes that everyone has to come up with themselves.

All I wanted to share was a recipe for success in a community based setting, without sidetracking the community democratic process ("my project first" VS "my project convinced a significant enough number of people on the dreams platform")

I would say that I almost entirely disagree on your outlook on how artwork should be created and for what purposes.

According to the numbers quoted above, at BM 2 million out of 35 million go to art grants. That's 5.7%

According to your request, 5.7% of 88.000 EUR should be art grants at Kiezburn - that makes 5000 EUR total. For all art projects.

I'm totally open to finding a proportional solution to KB.

If you check out where the rest of the money went for BM 2018 https://burningman.org/expenses/expenses-2018/ I think you'll find that KB has a lot fewer areas of overhead so it can likely afford to, for example, use some of the percent allocated to payroll which for KB is 0 and BM is 32. So I bet we can boost that percentage and do even better than BM in terms of percent of the money going towards art. That's amazing!

According to the numbers quoted above, at BM 2 million out of 35 million go to art grants. That's 5.7%

According to your request, 5.7% of 88.000 EUR should be art grants at Kiezburn - that makes 5000 EUR total. For all art projects.

Looking at these numbers, art grants are severely overfunded at Kiezburn. I am not saying that that's a bad thing - just to give the whole discussion a bit of a different numbers (reality) framework.

I see no reason why "big art" should bypass the will-of-the-community process (dreams platform). If that's what people want, they will alocate their tokens to it. If not, then not.

More interesting to think about in any kind of an art project, from the artist's point of view, especially in a community funded effort without big sponsors, is:

1. What kind of art does the community want to spend their money on (VS: what kind of art do I as an artist want to make, with others paying for that)

2. Can my art serve a purpose at the burn (eg: a multi room artistic cuddle puddle VS an effigy)

If you center your creative process around serving the stakeholders (=those that pay for it, the community), then I see as result your artwork as the highest-funded dream of them all. No matter if it is a big or a small project. If you don't, it will not be funded.

Big projects will proportionately even more have to take into account their purpusefulness for those that fund them.

See it as a challenge and practical exercise: If you can win a big grant in a fair way like that, you really understand how to put the audience at the center of your art. If you master that, you will also succeed in making a living from your art. Even without sponsors, donors, or connections. Just by people loving your art and willingly giving their money for it.

Thanks Benjamin for the detailed response. We did in fact meet several times. I was involved in funding & placement of your discobooth several years and taking up the connect you made to the Dutch burners that brought big art to Kiez Burn. I have been in Kiez Burn's first year's art grant committee and helped set up Dreams last year from conceptualization to after-event care (and artists were involved from the start). I have personally also brought (bigger-ish) art to burns besides Kiez Burn (although not yet to the majestic level you did).

I understand you might have less of a feel or appreciation of how Kiez Burn is organized. To several people deeply involved however, it makes a world of difference and is for me personally one of the reasons I am not so interested or impressed by Burning Man. In my previous comment, I also made an attempt at highlighting "how Kiez Burn works" is related to the Kiez Burn principles.

Given the response from leads & experts, following the Advice Process, I would suggest you change your proposal to address the concerns from the people who commented. People have already pointed to the Dreamer thread as a place of further deliberation.

I believe the points you made about the Dreams platform not being perfect yet, are all SUPER valid! I totally agree with almost all of them.

• Needs to be earlier: I pushed hard to have the Dreams platform ready for 2020 and it now is, thanks to Zach! So we can actually already have a big art round now.

• quicker decisions: given the Dreams platform is live: we can make a first decision round by mid/end February

• reimbursements and support and all that: actually, that could be easily done, even with the dreams platform, you can have a team that focuses on enabling big art. We did allow for pre-funding in the past as well

If you want to continue exploring the concept of an art grant committee, I would also suggest you argue a bit more deeply:

• why such a big decision should be taken by a small group of people instead of a wider audience

• who should be on that team

• How can the above be made possible while being transparent & perceived as fair (which seem to be the 2 main feedback points in this thread)

I would also like to encourage you to change your thread to document the process & feedback. You can orientate on the Advice process (see link above) or a practical example. We are still working on a template for an advice process post.

One last comment on something you wrote in a later comment "it's impossible to make everyone happy". What we found and has been our goal, is not to make everyone happy with the funding they receive, but the target rather was to have most people be happy with the process. From the experience of the past 3 years, clear rules & more transparency, has been key in getting to that point.

You can find the chart in the spreadsheet in token redistribution discussion I linked in my previous post.

Nope, I'll check it out! I tried to get involved in Dreams last year when I first realized the issues I saw in it for creating art. I found that overall I did not think the direction is correct as a whole. Will check out the thread.

@Benjamin Langholz Are you aware of this thread https://talk.kiezburn.org/d/XHhwWky3/temporary-dreamer-thread? Are you able and willing to participate in that discussion to fix/shape the Dreams platform for this year? Do you think the Dreams platform could be modified to help get to more art at KB, or are you certain that another way is the only way? I think your opinions/ideas might be useful over there.

I think it's important that people are enabled to be realistic with the possible popularity and thus funding of their art projects. The budget in numbers as a background info can help to understand reality and chances.

Thus said, if you have a smart community approach to making art, and beforehand do your homework for success, like finding other artists who co-create your project with you, activate the camps that might contribute to it (or profit from it), have your core team and friends know the project inside-out already before it goes online as a dream, and generally have an amazing art project that also adds practical value, then you will get your project easily voted for sufficiently.

I think that asking how the proposed process will minimise the negative impact is reasonable.

I honestly don't know at this point I can make guess about how (like i said about by setting clear expectations) but would love more input from those (especially artist) who found the previous systems KB used negative.

But I think what I'm also focused on is the positives. I think I can help make art appear at KB this way. As we saw last year Dreams didn't foster this possibility. So I'm willing to navigate the negatives in favor of the positives.

I understand and even agree with all/most of what you have said. What I'm saying is that "people were disappointed and even quite angry" is a real problem if we're trying to foster a sustainable community. If people feel disenfranchised by the process by which we assign funding, that's a real problem that needs to be addressed. Yes - it's impossible to make everyone happy. Yes - it's impossible to fund all potential art projects. Yes - practically, some decision has to be made, somehow. The point is, we need to minimise the negative impact of that... and the suggestion is that we find a process that most people believe is fair and transparent. I'd like to think that many of us here are open to other suggestions. I think that asking how the proposed process will minimise the negative impact is reasonable.

I have no doubt that people were disappointed and even quite angry not to receive an art grant. People work hard on their proposals, and even submitting them is a huge gift so it makes sense that they can feel quite negatively when facing a moment of rejection. This happens every year for BM as well. I've experienced it myself many times, it's a shitty feeling. However, the artist still contribute. They find ways to create their work anyways (sometimes at unimaginable scale), join other projects for that year, and know that there will be another chance next year.

With a limited budget, it's impossible to make everyone happy and I don't think the goal should be to do so. I think the limited resources of KB need to be condensed to be meaningful to an art project. That's why I proposed only attempting to fund/support 3-5 projects. If the available budget is smaller I would then propose to shrink the number of projects to be selected to even 1 or 2. There will also still be the Dreams Platform so this is not the only source of funding. It's specifically an effort to try and bring some larger-scale artwork to KB.

From an artist's perspective, I think being able to assume consistency in process year over year might be the most important thing. Facing that feeling or rejection while having to figure out new systems and new frustration with those systems is even worse. As well as not being able to assume it will happen again next year and that there will be another chance.

Edit:

To be clear I obviously don't want to make people unhappy for not receiving a grant. I just see it as logical that it does happen.

Maybe it's a matter of setting expectations. I think if it is very clear there will be a limited number for projects, that they will be selected because we are looking for a certain kind of project, and that there will be another chance next year (start planning now!). Then it wouldn't be such a hard moment.

I was not directly involved either, so I'm not the best person to provide details, but I saw the fallout from it.

You can address the concerns from a hypothetical standpoint though, i.e. address the concern that if the decision of who and what gets funded and how much is made behind closed doors by a select group of people, how do we deal with negativity that may come from that, and/or how can we avoid it.

I'm not saying that's not possible... I think it probably is. Just saying addressing that clearly and openly is important.

I would love more details as I was not involved. Also, I am not proposing reverting to a previous system as I'm not familiar with a previous system.

In regards to Waldo's comment "it was a secret decision that people felt disconnected from (lack of transparency)"... I think that's an overly cautious description of what happened, at the expense of fully capturing the negativity that surrounded it. People were pissed, accusations were thrown around. Same thing happened last year with the Dream token redistribution. @Benjamin Langholz if you would like you like to make this change back to the old system, I think it's imperative that you genuinely consider and address these concerns, and suggest a way to avoid these problems.

Hey @waldo I don't think we've met. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. You bring up some good points.

I guess I am part of the community that doesn't value as much the process of the organization as I do the result. I want Art to be present. I want there to be significant budgets available to artists to create that art. I value that art showing up at KiezBurn infinitely more than the ideas of decentralization or transparency. I don't go to Burning Man for transparency in an organizational structure. I go there to explore another world where incredible things are possible.

That being said the event does need to be organized.

it was a secret decision that people felt disconnected from (lack of transparency)

To me, the announcement of the art grant recipients is one of the most exciting moments leading up to a burn.

There was a lot of burden on the central organization to facilitate these discussions, which were often contentious (who gets to be on that team?) and caused friction within the community

I get this. It's a lot of work. I've worked with the Art organizational teams of 3 different burns. I'm an artist so I understand the needs of artists. I have energy at this moment to put into this cause. I'm volunteering to organize this.

participation & community: people engaged more with art & budget discussions (62% participation rate in voting!)

Participation is awesome. At this point, I'm not suggesting we get rid of Dreams. Let people participate and distribute a portion of the funds.

inclusion: there were more projects and a lot of smaller workshops that happened

Again this is great. I think the funds in dreams outside of the funds I'm suggesting to be allocated towards the Art Department should be more than enough to cover smaller projects and workshops.

co-operation: there was more collaboration between camps & art + it also made the whole Kiez Burn backend go much smoother in collaborating with power, placement, finance,...

Also great but I don't see what it has to do with Dream Platform. It seems like something that should continue to happen regardless as KB is still very small and it's a challenge to be self-reliant.

The chart is great! I bet we may have deffinitions of what qualifies as art. Where can I find these numbers so I can have a look myself? (sorry new to this whole digital world).

Don't go back to intransparent behind-closed-doors decisions from people that were never elected. Instead think how we could do it while keeping our strong points:

Is there someone who has stepped up to lead this effort? Again all I want to see is big art at KB I would much rather be making it than helping to organize the system to make it.

Allowing art to be be uploaded to the Dreams platform now and allowing everyone to vote for art (e.g. everyone who had a ticket in 2019, everyone who registers somewhere, people who buy a 2020 ticket through a ticket sale that happens in February,...)

I do not believe art is best curated in a mass election. I don't believe most decisions are best made by mass elections. I don't see how this organizational style relates to the 10 principals or necessarily helps to create a better event in terms of the principals.

I think it would have been wise to have involved artists who create the kind of artwork that we would like to see at KB more directly in the designing of the system which is meant to be for their benefit. For myself and many other artists who I have spoken to who create work on a similar scale the idea of the Dreams Platform is quite offputting. Even when limited to only "art". I prefer a system where a group of informed people make a decision and invest themselves in the artwork that they select. Not a system where the most likely way to have your project funded is by having the most friends attending.

@waldo - what about a hybrid model that allows for limited curation for quality and variety and then the voting round? This is elaborated on in my post above?

TL;DR: I agree with making more (big) art at Kiez Burn and believe we can make it happen without going back to behind-closed-doors decisions.

Before we had the Dreams platform, we had an art team that took in proposals for art and then decided on which art would get funded how much. The issues with that process:

• it was a secret decision that people felt disconnected from (lack of transparency)

• There was a lot of burden on the central organization to facilitate these discussions, which were often contentious (who gets to be on that team?) and caused friction within the community

The Dreams platform & process addressed these concerns and had additional benefits:

• participation & community: people engaged more with art & budget discussions (62% participation rate in voting!)

• inclusion: there were more projects and a lot of smaller workshops that happened

• co-operation: there was more collaboration between camps & art + it also made the whole Kiez Burn backend go much smoother in collaborating with power, placement, finance,...

We also had issues with the Dreams platform: (see attachment, categories are based on my own judgment)

• Infrastructure projects: people did not realize these projects already got minimum funding

• we did not see a lot of big art funded due to the inherent structure of Dreams (a 10€ dream gets the same visibility as a 600€ dream)

• Energy-draining discussions on token redistribution

• Kieze were disproportionally getting a lot of €€€.

• Dream budgets were separate instead of on the platform (people had to provide a spreadsheet, that was impractical, would be better to have that budget on Dreams, so participants can also check out what it is being spent on)

My suggestion:

Don't go back to intransparent behind-closed-doors decisions from people that were never elected. Instead think how we could do it while keeping our strong points:

• How could the Dreams platform facilitate all of the above, while favoring more art? (e.g. separate tokens for the categories, different sorting on the platform, providing ticket holders more transparency on what is Kiez, what is art, what is infrastructure,...)

• How could we have a (parallel) process of allocating more funding towards big art in a transparent and inclusive process? This could take the form of:

  • an "art" general assembly with online access where everyone can vote to allocate a certain amount of €€ to certain projects

  • Allowing art to be be uploaded to the Dreams platform now and allowing everyone to vote for art (e.g. everyone who had a ticket in 2019, everyone who registers somewhere, people who buy a 2020 ticket through a ticket sale that happens in February,...)

Open to a realistic suggestion on the budget for this. Although we would also need to be realistic about what could be possible to produce from the said budget.

Pretty sure 15k was close to the entire dreams platform payout last year, so I wonder if this is realistic for 3-4 art projects.

@Saskia (The Fuzzy Facilitator) - I am not saying take the burn out of the burn. Burn what you like, burn the Effigy and anything else. I am not sure you have followed the link to the Temple of Tokamak project or read it completely? It is (one) piece of permanent art that Scandi burners gifted to the community that hosts the burn for the next 1-2-3 years.

Suggestion re dreams: Split in into two sections - one for camps and camp accessories and one for art and individual submissions, where the teruslt has to be in a common area like art hill and not in a camp...?

2nd this.
Taking the burn out of the burn is pretty meh.
It's hard enough to burn anyways because of Fire Hazard usually, so let's see.

In terms of permanent art, AfikaBurn does this where they leave some things for several years. I find it actually takes away from the immediacy or ephemeral nature of the event a bit. It makes the place feel familiar instead of fresh as well as in a smaller landscape could quickly become very crowded.

I think it could be possible and beneficial in some cases though so I think that's definitely something that could be left to the artist to advocate for if they feel it's correct for their artwork.

Art doesn't need to be burned, although I think it's an important and unique artistic possibility of a burn event which I would never advocate to remove. I don't think stockpiling it on the grounds of the event is the ultimate answer either.

I would love to eventually tighten up the Dreams Platform 🙂 I guess I just see that as something that will take time. I think people are quite attached to the openness of it at the moment and see altering that to be very counter to it's nature. I also see it as a much larger project. I want to focus my energy specifically on trying to bring Larger scale interactive artwork to KiezBurn. So, for now, I think this is the best way for me to contribute.

A key problem I see with the Dreams Platform is the timing. It happens too late. The amount of money you might receive is known way too close to the event and you don't actually receive any of it upfront. This isn't conducive to making large art. One needs time (BM starts the grant process in October for the event in August) and money (Most grant programs give you a significant percentage upfront to cover costs as they are incurred. If an artist must front all the money then this is excluding artists who can't afford to do this).

Also I don't think things like sound systems should be funded by the Dreams Platform at all they are meant to be the gift of the theme camp. That's why a theme camp gets placement on the map before the event because they have promised a gift. And that's why they have camp dues to cover the costs of the gift they decided to bring to KB.

I have been thinking about how to address our lack of art (I totally agree with you @Benjamin Langholz , last year's Art Plateau was sad). I also came to an idea of curation, but a bit differently.

I am dreaming to make Dreams Platform exclusively for dreams - no infrastructure such as toilets etc. That is confusing.

I am dreaming of a way to ensure the quality and variety of dreams by "pre-Dreams-Platform curation."

I imagine an open call from art across a number of categories - could be "big ass art", "performance" "workshop", "interactive installation", "light installation", "stage", "sexy stuff" "other", "soundsystem" etc. (need to be better defined) - provided with full estimated budget

We also define what is the maximum possible amount per category KB would fund (and this would limit the amount of pieces we can have in each category). Then:

• Artists/performers/workshoppers/etc. apply in each category.

• KB ART Curation committee selects the pieces that make it to the Dream platform.

• Hippies have a say by using hearts (that have more weight than before!) to designate their favourites.

• KB finances funds hippie-favourited pieces to the max of agreed limit.

• The rest are open to crowdfunding, camp-self-funding etc.

As a P.S. I also love the idea of having one piece of big-ass-permanent-art that we co-create for the location and leave it there (with agreement) such as http://www.alscherer.com/the-temple-of-tokamak - I think the times of burning everything are kinda over - CO2 etc.

What do you think @Benjamin Langholz ?

<3

Glad to hear your thoughts as a Dream Guide!

In terms of deciding / supporting I think there is a lot of context that goes into the decision of if an Artwork should be chosen for a burn. These are not only subjective (is this art / is this good art) but also more objective questions (is this feasible, do they have the resources, do they have the potential skills). I don't think that asking everyone who's purchased a ticket to vote is a nuanced enough way to make these decisions.

Thanks for initiating this @Benjamin Langholz ! I have been dreamguiding last year and was very disappointed that one of the big interactive artwork proposals that I guided was the only one which didn't get funded - it really showed up a problem.

I think having an art department for the biggest artworks is generally a good idea. Especially to start getting the word out to artists and get them motivated already. Wether the art department actually decides or just supports could be open for discussion. There could also be an amount of dreams platform tokens allocated ONLY to big artworks. (We have been talking about this at the workshop last week, can't tag Gur in this for some reason)

I still think the Dreams Platform is a great tool to use to get everyone involved in deciding on the rest of the funding - and I am sure we can improve the process so it still funds enough - and a variety of - smaller art projects as well as all the infrastructure. Happy to get involved in this process :)

I however continue to feel a sort of top-down vibe from you. Art and Artist VS who - us normal mortals? I'm a bit wary of that.

Haha fair enough. It's my area of interest for helping or organize KB and my life in general so it makes sense that I would come off having artists' interests in mind 🙂 You seem a bit focused around the idea of anarchistic organization / environmental concerns. These are probably things you care about in your life 🙂

but you can also see our current budget above. Baby steps but bolder steps? :D

I think regardless of the budget and size it's possible to take a step in this direction 😆

@waldo - looking at the fact that we are going radically anarchistic (or do-ocratic ;) ) - is it time for us to drop "Burn" from the name? As per Benjamin's comment?

It seems like a great topic for another thread. I'd contribute thoughts.

“Easiest way to bring cool expensive art as with bm, is to create great concept, set up budget, promote it and probably find a sponsor“

have you tired this? In my experience fundraising is a huge effort equivalent to a second full time job (while the first is actually building the artwork). I’ve raised over $15,000 through crowdfunding across several projects but it’s incredibly laborious and tedious. If there wasn’t a grant process for BM itself I would be much more hesitant to create art at scale there. I love building art, not fundraising. The grant process is an incredible gift to artist in this way.

“kiezburn is quite low budget for a 10k art pieces, it is just 1000 people contributing 100 on average, not 60k paying 500.”

Totally. BM also granted $2,000,000 to art this past year, funding hundreds of projects. I’m looking for the proportional solution for KB at it’s current scale, but to encourage the trajectory of hosting big art.

“Any art committee is a bad idea Inna community organizer events. Corruption is a bitch.”

Sorry you feel so strongly. Maybe you should join and help and then it won’t feel corrupt?

@Benjamin Langholz good point about the burn in the name.

I however continue to feel a sort of top-down vibe from you. Art and Artist VS who - us normal mortals? I'm a bit wary of that.

I do agree huge pieces are awesome (I've had witnessed the fairytale Playa of BM - my big favourite remains the Trojan Horse of 2011). I have seen your work as well and it's certainly impressive. I have also seen your proposal for KB 2019. Yes, I would love to see something of this scale at KB, but you can also see our current budget above. Baby steps but bolder steps? :D

I also understand that big art demands pre-planning and pre-budgeting! I agree we need to start "dreaming" way sooner and empower more impressive artworks.

@waldo - looking at the fact that we are going radically anarchistic (or do-ocratic ;) ) - is it time for us to drop "Burn" from the name? As per Benjamin's comment?

Easiest way to bring cool expensive art as with bm, is to create great concept, set up budget, promote it and probably find a sponsor, kiezburn is quite low budget for a 10k art pieces, it is just 1000 people contributing 100 on average, not 60k paying 500.

Any art committee is a bad idea Inna community organizer events. Corruption is a bitch.

Threading seems to be broken or missing this is in response to @Alina, also known as Milda!

the talk your talk sounds quite elitist to me personally. You are an Artist - and should be pre-paid/VIP-treated and we (smaller but as much fun projects) are not?

I don't necessarily want to distinguish by the physical size. More involvement and cost. So yes I think supporting a project that will cost €10,000 to produce should be handled differently than one that will cost €300. I think it's much more realistic that someone may be able to self-fund, or at least front the money for the €300 projects while not the one that costs €10,000. I think it's also reasonable to look at the number of human hours and labor that goes into building a 6m tall steel sculpture by a team of 15 people and compare that with the efforts of an individual bringing a smaller scale project. Both are welcome and encouraged. But it's important to acknowledge that they may have different needs and levels of support required.

I don't see KiezBurn as an extension of BM. It's way more grassroots and anarchist for that ;)

I've been thinking about this as well. I think it's totally fine to diverge from BM. In that case, drop the principals and the Burn from the name and don't piggyback off of BM's reputation. I think an anarchistic self-organized gathering is great! But it doesn't need to be a burn.

However I agree with you - I don't want to see our little Playa so art-bare again!

Great! I have the energy to try to make that happen and this is the way I'm interested to do it :)

@Benjamin Langholz I like your ambition. But the point is that KiezBurn is looking to foster a place that gives anyone the possibility to be an artist - or - Artist - if you like. For me this is what I love about this culture. I would argue that Burning Man has turned into a bit of a theme park by now - wasting millions of dollars leaving all idea of sustainability behind. And... the talk your talk sounds quite elitist to me personally. You are an Artist - and should be pre-paid/VIP-treated and we (smaller but as much fun projects) are not? I don't see KiezBurn as an extension of BM. It's way more grassroots and anarchist for that ;) I would love to see it stay that way. However I agree with you - I don't want to see our little Playa so art-bare again!

and

Completely agree with you re: large sound systems funding. I actually was unaware that these could be funded. My camp in 2018 completely self-funded the (smaller than UW and ZZR) soundsystem and the equipment for dancefloor area - I was surprised to find out that other camps got funding for that.

Thanks for detailing your answer.

I agree with you about your 2 main points on the timing and the reimbursement process which makes it more difficult to enable bigger/more expensive art.
I feel that those points can be fixed with a process improvement of the Dreams platform. Hopefully, those feedback can be taken to improve this in that direction.

I believe that ultimately the community should decide how we are using the budget, I think that's the beauty of Dreams. And if having eco-toilet funded, or a nice wristband, is more important to the community than having a big art piece on the hill, then we won't have big art again. And we should be fine with it..

An option could be to define beforehand a % of budget that would go for each category = x% for Art, x% for shared infrastructure, x% for camps, etc,.. I wouldn't sub-categorize Art.

Personally, I would also love to see more and bigger art happening at KB (and this is where my tokens would go in prio). But what I personally want doesn't really matter in that context..

I would love to hear more about the Art Grant process and why it was decided to move away from it.

I am not a fan of the Dreams Platform as a whole. I have observed with KiezBurn, and Borderlands that it has been used to fund primarily personal gifts and camp + event infrastructure. I don’t think this is appropriate and shifts the dynamic of a burn significantly. But this is for a thread of its own and for now I decided to limit my interests to just trying to find a way for Art to appear at KiezBurn.

Why I find the Dreams Platform ineffective for “Big-bigger / involved” Art

-A huge reason: It happens too late. The process not only is started too late (once tickets have been sold). Art takes time.

-Because of the voting system as an artist, you have no guarantee of any funding. Art is expensive. Decisions need to be made early in order to have time to create art.

-(as far as I understand it) Money from the Dreams Platform is only given as a reimbursement. This means that an artist must cover the costs of their artwork until after the event. This limits who can participate in making art, as well as the scale at which they can create. The grant processes I have been involved with all distribute the funds in stages but no more then 10% is held until after the event. Meaning an artist is able to purchase materials, rent space, pay for services and logistics, directly from the grant funds.

-Because Dreams covers such a wide range of possibilities it makes sense that individual projects are not heavily supported by Dream Guides. Art is hard. Having a group of people specifically dedicated to enabling it is important.

-I think the Dreams Platform is created to be intentionally open-ended about what can be submitted. If we want the kind of art that I’m describing we need to ask for it.

-As an artist myself who submitted a Dream last year before deciding to remove it I found that having my artwork compete for attention next to toilets, sound system rentals, piles of dirt, bars, domes, tents, and wristbands felt incorrect. It didn’t feel like a place where I wanted to list something so personal to me. Art is an incredible Gift. It should be treated with respect.

-Because it didn’t work. I think most people were dissatisfied with the lack of artwork at KiezBurn 2019.

I’ll continue to elaborate as more time appears.

Nice proposal, thanks !
Can I ask why do you think the Dreams Platform is not an effective way to create opportunities for this kind of art ?

To me, one of the main point of the Dreams platform is to give the decision on what happens at Kiez Burn to the whole community, rather than to a small group of curators.

(If people don't vote for larger art installation, and rather give tokens for experiential, music or performance art, that's the way it is)

I was part of the Art Grant team 2 years ago, and your proposal for this year sounds to me like going back to an old process, while we initiated a new and decentralized approach last year with Dreams.

Superb idea!

nice one. had the idea to include an art gallery for "cafe wonderland" camp as i also noticed the lack of art in the last years. but not too sure about our resources at the moment as we didnt start any planning yet...but good thinking, having some art crew for the festival would be essential!

I thought I did?
Never mind.... forgot to press vote...!

Hit agree on the proposal 😉

Totally agree and totally in.

There has been a disproportionate lack of interactive visual art (other than the camp setups) the year I went and it was a bit disappointing. Bad weather and a somewhat negfative reaction to the site conditions prevented me from contribuiting and while I'm not 100% sure I'm going this year, I'd love to help in any way I can.