<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">I think we're too quick to label sincere discussion of community standards as "Drama", when obviously such discussion is completely necessary in a place with no explicit rules beyond "Be excellent to each other". <div><br><div>As far as I can tell, the structure of Noisebridge is such to encourage hacking of the space culture *itself*, and such hackery is going to involve a whole lot of talking things out.</div><div><br></div><div>This discussion *is* a collaborative creative process. Discussion is constructive, and should be encouraged. Vigilantism is oppressive, and should be discussed.</div><div><br></div><div>- Brink<br><div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On May 4, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Jehan Tremback wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">Sounds like a great model, but we need actual criteria, not vigilantes calling the cops on people they don't like.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Martin Bogomolni <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:martinbogo@gmail.com" target="_blank">martinbogo@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Yep, and that's pretty much the ATX Hackerspace model.. and we're at<br>
100+ members and up to tons of productive and fun stuff, so<br>
something's Going Right(tm).<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
-M<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:49 PM, David Rorex <<a href="mailto:drorex@gmail.com">drorex@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I wouldn't say AMT is a private club, to my knowledge up to this point<br>
> nobody who wanted to visit has ever been turned away, and nobody who wanted<br>
> to become a member has ever been rejected. However the policy is such that<br>
> non-members are only allowed inside when members are around, and the only<br>
> way to get a key is to become a member. Also we specifically state that all<br>
> of our events are open to the public and non members are welcome. Our<br>
> mission statement is specifically to focus on hacking/making/building/<br>
> arting, and not consensus/anarchy/extreme inclusion/politics/whatever.<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:11 PM, jim <<a href="mailto:jim@well.com">jim@well.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> The circumstance at 83c was similar to 2169: a door<br>
>> that is locked and people inside who pretty much let<br>
>> in anyone who knocked.<br>
>> As I understand things, The discussions people had<br>
>> in the planning phase included an acknowledgement of a<br>
>> publicly open place and its foreseeable problems.<br>
>> Note that AMTD is pretty much a private club, and<br>
>> deliberately so to test a model different from<br>
>> Noisebridge's.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 13:25 -0700, Martin Bogomolni wrote:<br>
>> > Jim,<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Originally, that was _not_ the case. There was a door, and to get in<br>
>> > you needed a key for that door. The key was given to you _after_ you<br>
>> > had petitioned for membership in The Book, and consensus was achieved<br>
>> > for your induction.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > You could, of course, let someone in if you had a key... and if you<br>
>> > knocked on the door, if someone let you into the shop, you were<br>
>> > responsible for having let them in. There was no "open door"<br>
>> > policy.. the lock was locked.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > We have a very permeable "door" at the moment, and there are<br>
>> > non-keyholders inside the space who will let other non-keyholders in.<br>
>> > Yes, this was -possible- at the old 83c space, but it generally<br>
>> > wasn't an issue since it was a very small space and a fairly tight<br>
>> > community.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > -M<br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:06 PM, jim <<a href="mailto:jim@well.com">jim@well.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > My understanding is that the original concept<br>
>> > > of Noisebridge was to be open to the public.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
>> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>
_______________________________________________<br>Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div></body></html>