Re: pacer and lollapalooza

[Carl Malamud <xxxx@media.org>]

On Jul 25, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Aaron Swartz wrote:

> Naive question: what's the problem with a paper board? Funders get  
> turned off?

sort of.

a paper board is much better than a disfunctional board.  no doubt  
about that.  and, if you have your money already or know you're going  
to get it without help, then you can get away with a paper board.

but, it is like having a paper business plan (e.g., one for VCs  
instead of one for yourself).  You don't get the benefit of what the  
device is meant for.  A good board will help you do stuff: raise  
money, provides intros, and lend credibility.  You need at least one  
active member for when you do your yearly audit dance (which requires  
somebody besides you monitoring the finances on an ongoing basis ... / 
mtr does that for me),

they don't need to be actively involved ... Hal Varian monitors my  
regular email stream, talks to me a few times a year, and sometimes  
has suggestions or intros for me.  but, he's way too busy to be  
screwing around.

So, it's a matter of balance.  Less involved is certainly better than  
randomly involved too often.