Talk:CouchSurfing "conversion" issues

This reads like a heavily biased diatribe and may not be the most constructive way to encourage people to make the switch to BeWelcome.


 * A benefit corporation and a b-corp are the same thing.
 * CouchSurfing is still listed on B-Labs website. Doling out allegations of falsifying applications to B-Labs with no proof discredits the author of this document. Aside from that B-Labs has no authority, they merely provide a consulting service to help corporations meet state guidelines.

Gardner Bickford (talk) 21:52, 22 December 2012 (CET)


 * A Benefit corporation is defined structure by US law in several states (which clearly have authority), a B corporation is merely a label given out by a private third party organization called B-Lab (which you claim has no authority). As far as I understood a Benefit corporation can not at the same time be a C corporation. Whereas CouchSurfing is a legally C corporation given a B corporation label.  So how can B corp and Benefit corp be the same thing?  They might be close but in the United States a C corporation "is legally bound to the singular purpose of profit-maximization for its shareholders". So I struggle to see how these are the same thing.
 * I understand that false allegations are not the best way to show anything. But looking at this from a bigger perspective we see that couchsurfing has a history of bending the truth, or at least not doing much to rectify any false claims, especially when they have been made in the advantage of couchsurfing. See for example this page claiming that "it is impossible for couchsurfing to make a profit" and that "it cannot be sold". I know I have written those words myself, but that was because was given the impression that this was truly so. Moreover this page has not been changed since January 2008. I'd say the burden is with couchsurfing whenever there is any form of doubt.

guaka (talk) 10:56, 23 December 2012 (CET)

Trave (talk) 16:54, 24 December 2012 (CET)
 * Re: the falsified B-Labs certification. As I understand it, the author wanted to point out the fact that no matter how CouchSurfing got the B-Labs certification, that certification was issued roughly at the same time as the for-profit conversion (August 2011). That means that whatever the B-Labs looked at, was still from the no-profit company. How on Earth can they certificate the behaviour of something that has not yet started to exist remains unexplained.

Corporation
The page is incorrect from the very beginning when it says CouchSurfing was created as a non-profit entity. I didn't make any changes yet because it has been translated into many other languages as well, but let me clarify from what I know.

Casey Felton the founder of CS and did incorporate the company in New Hampshire. The reason for incorporation primarily for a small business is primarily to limit the liability of the owners in case of something bad happening. If someone gets hurt and blames Couchsurfing, you can blame the company, but the owners are considered separate from the company and it protects their personal money and property. This means CouchSurfing HAS ALWAYS BEEN A CORPORATION!

Now Casey had submitted a request for non-profit 501(c)(3) status meaning that the corporation is considered a public benefit and different tax rules would apply. That pretty much is all 501(c)(3) means because it can still make a profit even through it is not allowed to pay dividends and distribute said profits. But the IRS decided that Couchsurfing did not fit any existing category for a non-profit and the application was denied. Again, COUCHSURFING WAS A CORPORATION AND NEVER A NON-PROFIT. Headtrip (talk) 14:54, 27 February 2013 (CET)