<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body >Al and Madelynn,<div><br></div><div>Both in this thread and at the last meeting I have been overwhelmed with the sense that this will never become a dialog. It feels like an epic monolog that's bound to flame out.</div><div><br></div><div>But let' try anyway...</div><div><br></div><div>What I did say on Tuesday was that 1. I didn't know where to begin and 2. Quoted the first line from noisebridge.net "Noisebridge is an infrastructure provider for technical-creative projects, collaboratively run by our members." Which is to say, not only a space where collaboration happens, but a space collaboratively run by our members. Your proposal derides this statement in two ways. 1. Moving to a majoritarian system creates less opportunity for collaboration on decision making and 2. It hands over the process to a board of directors from the hands of the membership.</div><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>-------- Original message --------<br>From: Al Sweigart <asweigart@gmail.com> <br>Date:12/18/2013 19:06 (GMT-08:00) <br>To: Rubin Abdi <rubin@starset.net> <br>Cc: noisebridge-discuss <noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net> <br>Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Keeping associate members in their place <br><br><div dir="ltr">It's in the meeting notes: <a href="https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Meeting_Notes_2013_12_17">https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Meeting_Notes_2013_12_17</a><div><br></div><div>Basically, Danny blocks because other people would block. Kevin blocks because Noisebridge is a collaborative space and majority voting would undo or impinge on that. I encourage them (or anyone else) to correct this description, but it's what I came away from the meeting with. (And, of course, if Danny and Kevin don't have time to reply to the list, that doesn't mean they implicitly agree with my description.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>The "other people who would block" I can only take a guess at, and half of them aren't even living in SF anymore. If I try to read people's minds about this issue I'm going to fail; I'd rather have them chime in on the mailing list or show up at a meeting if they have strong feelings about this.</div>
<div><br></div><div>-Al</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Rubin Abdi <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rubin@starset.net" target="_blank">rubin@starset.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Al Sweigart wrote, On 2013-12-18 18:44:<br>
<div class="im">> The most common tactic in Noisebridge politics is to get people to stop<br>
> speaking up about issues.<br>
<br>
</div>Then that sounds like an entirely different issue that needs attention.<br>
Don't cut off the finger when all that is needed is a bandage.<br>
<br>
If I were you I would call out those members.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Rubin<br>
<a href="mailto:rubin@starset.net">rubin@starset.net</a><br>
<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>
</body>