Hey, I don't _like_ the process. I never have. I've had lots of lengthy arguments about it. I think consensus leads us to moral hazards like this.<div><br></div><div>But, there ya go. It's what we have.</div><div>
<br></div><div>Could I interest you in a constitutional democracy? Would you like fries with that?<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Adrian Bankhead <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:invisibleman_24@yahoo.com">invisibleman_24@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div>So, in the name of "do-ocracy", we have the ability to ban people even before the group has reached consensus. And because there is no due process, the banned person can't defend themselves. Do I understand this correctly?<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><br>
<div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><font size="2" face="Tahoma">
<hr size="1">
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">From:</span></b> Crutcher Dunnavant <<a href="mailto:crutcher@gmail.com" target="_blank">crutcher@gmail.com</a>><div class="im"><br><b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b> Adrian Bankhead <<a href="mailto:invisibleman_24@yahoo.com" target="_blank">invisibleman_24@yahoo.com</a>><br>
</div><b><span style="font-weight:bold">Cc:</span></b> Rubin Abdi <<a href="mailto:rubin@starset.net" target="_blank">rubin@starset.net</a>>; <a href="mailto:noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net" target="_blank">noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b> Wed, 23 February, 2011 23:22:32<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br><b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Banning Patrick from Noisebridge<br>
</div></div></font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>Patrick doesn't have any rights to defend himself; because no one at noisebridge has the right to defend themselves from consensus.
<div><br></div>
<div>
<div>Our charter doesn't define a criminal system, it merely defines a consensus process.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>If he's not a member, he doesn't even have the right to speak at a meeting.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Now, I don't _like_ he consensus process, but that's the one we've got; and in that process ... he's SOL.</div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Adrian Bankhead <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:invisibleman_24@yahoo.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">invisibleman_24@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="border-left:#ccc 1px solid;margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote">Rubin,<br><br>Are you just "fairly certain" or can you (or anyone) provide absolute<br>assurance that Patrick will have the ability to respond formally to the charges<br>
that have been made against him before he is banned? Or is that not how things<br>work around here? Has Patrick been informed of his right to defend himself,<br>and has he been formally invited to answer these *very* serious allegations? <br>
Because until I raised the question, I had not seen any discussion at all of<br>Patrick's rights with regards to being banned. I had assumed that he had been<br>banned from your first "ban" email, and that his ban would simply be ratified<br>
after-the-fact in group discussion. ("Trust us") Apparently I went through like<br>a hundred emails and I've mistaken (and
horrified) the whole time. If I am,<br>then Patrick might be as well.<br><br>I'm sorry for pressing the issue - but I'd like to feel like I'm joining a co-op<br>rather than a lynch-mob.<br><br>Also, do you really think that seeking clarification about process is "pissing<br>
all over the email list"? Are you telling me that my only option to trust you? <br>Is this how things work at Noisebridge?<br>
<div>
<div></div>
<div><br>----- Original Message ----<br>From: Rubin Abdi <<a href="mailto:rubin@starset.net" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">rubin@starset.net</a>><br>To: Adrian Bankhead <<a href="mailto:invisibleman_24@yahoo.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">invisibleman_24@yahoo.com</a>><br>
Cc: Rachel McConnell <<a href="mailto:rachel@xtreme.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">rachel@xtreme.com</a>>; Noisebridge Discuss<br><<a href="mailto:noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a>><br>
Sent: Wed, 23 February, 2011 20:20:15<br>Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Banning Patrick from Noisebridge<br><br>Adrian Bankhead wrote, On 20110223 194552:<br>> In addition to the fact a definitive action was taken
before people had time to<br>><br>> consense, the thing that I'm most disturbed about is that Patrick was never<br>> given the opportunity to speak in his own defense to the group, or to reply<br>> formally to accusations ("evidence"). Even if he is a total scumbag, he<br>
> still deserves the opportunity to defend himself prior to banning. And<br>> Noisebridge guard jealously its collective autonomy, which is strengthened when<br>><br>> it protects the rights of the accused and insists on hearing arguments from all<br>
><br>> sides before making decisions.<br><br>No decision has been made. I'm fairly sure he's welcome to defend<br>himself here, in person to anyone and at the next Tuesday meeting.<br><br>The two things that were established at the meeting were...<br>
<br>* A bunch of people would like it if Patrick wasn't allowed in the space<br>due to reasons related to people feeling unsafe around him, and
will<br>make this known to him in person if he does show up in the space,<br>additionally will ask him to leave. I'm sure some will be more graceful<br>then others. A list of these people is attached to the first message of<br>
this thread. How each of these people actually do the ask will differ<br>from person to person. I'm one of those people.<br><br>* A consensus item to be brought up at the next meeting to formally ban<br>Patrick from the space. This is giving everyone, including Patrick, a<br>
week to figure things out. This discussion is part of that figuring<br>things out.<br><br>Folks can bitch and moan about how wrong this is. That's great. None of<br>you are Patrick. If I was in his shoes, and all that was said about me<br>
was false, I would have either said something by now or decided that<br>this community isn't worth my time and moved on.<br><br>All in all, unless Patrick has a good bullet pointed response to all<br>that is against him and
resolves our issues, even if we don't reach<br>consensus next week (we wont, taking bets now), I think the general tone<br>has been established that a bunch of really awesome people would like<br>him to not be a dick and/or never to return to Noisebridge again and<br>
that he's gotten part or all of that message.<br><br>If you think differently, stop bitching about it on the list and<br>actually seek us out and talk to us directly about why we feel this is a<br>positive course of action tot take for the space. Pissing all over the<br>
mailing list without actually talking with those involves doesn't really<br>help folks.<br><br>--<br>Rubin Abdi<br><a href="mailto:rubin@starset.net" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">rubin@starset.net</a><br></div></div>
<div>
<div></div>
<div>_______________________________________________<br>Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all">
<br>-- <br>Crutcher Dunnavant <<a href="mailto:crutcher@gmail.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">crutcher@gmail.com</a>><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>
-- <br>Crutcher Dunnavant <<a href="mailto:crutcher@gmail.com">crutcher@gmail.com</a>><br>
</div>