Thoughts on renaming to 'Omni Oakland Commons' or 'Omni Commons'?
That sounds cool, will bring up at the next meeting and on our mailing list.
Not convinced that the reasoning behind changing the name is rational (the idea that the government will harass us because we are called a "collective", I think they have plenty of other reasons to harass us). Wouldn't block it though.
Timeless, Infinite Light
Not convinced that this is necessary either but I'm open to the idea. "Omni Oakland Commons" seems like an awkward mouthful, but "Omni Commons" has a nice, ring to it. It might make sense to name the project by delineating between the building and collective of collectives, for example: Omni Collective is the governing body that manages the space, whereas Omni Commons is the physical building we inhabit. But to refer to the collective group as a commons doesn't really make sense to me.
- I like it - "Omni Collective" for the governing body, and "Omni Commons" (or just "The Omni") for the building. --Patrik (talk) 18:50, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
In agreement with Timeless, Infinite Light.
Oakland Nights Live
I recommend steering clear of having Oakland in a name. We have it in our name and we mean it as the location for the show, and people assume that we only focus on Oakland and exclude everything else. A similar thing may happen to the Omni. Also, like TIL said is a mouthful (and is redundant!).
Food Not Bombs
Omni Commons has a nice ring to it, but it does sort of sound like a strip mall. But we think the collective should not shy away from calling itself that - in fact, I think it is important to be open and public about our deviation from a corporate model.