<p dir="ltr">I can answer that question:</p>
<p dir="ltr">Yes, I do mind. It is tedious and tiring to recount the details each time and often they "don't count" or are somehow deemed insufficient. So I'd rather not.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I know this will be met with the usual "witch hunt" and "what about false accusations" and other tropes that are as dead end as they are predictable. I want to keep this thread productive. Hannah might want to talk about it, but I don't. That's a sucker's game.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Back to the point, Noisebridge membership does have the additional privileges that Hannah outlined. In addition, it really *never* been the case that "we only have one rule" has been true. Currently there are policies that differentiate members and nonmembers besides blocking.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Hi,</p>
<p dir="ltr">"two literal rapists." Would you mind going into more details?<br></p>
<p dir="ltr">-a</p>
<p dir="ltr">On 24 December 2013 10:25, Hannah Grimm <<a href="mailto:dharlette@gmail.com">dharlette@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Danny,<br>
> This is simply false; there are absolutely privileges to membership besides<br>
> blocking, though most of them are recent. For example, you are not supposed<br>
> to be in the space unless you are a member or sponsored by a member<br>
> (associate or capitol-M). While anyone can ask someone to leave and not<br>
> come back until the next meeting (at which point people can have a vote to<br>
> ban them), but the anti-harassment policy allows a member to ban someone who<br>
> is violating the anti-harassment policy, without having to go through<br>
> consensus. If such an action is decided to have been done in error, the<br>
> membership can then allow them back via consensus. Essentially, for the<br>
> case of harassment, the way we remove harassers is flipped: now a harasser<br>
> is removed by default, and it takes consensus to bring them back, instead of<br>
> people who have been accused of rape multiple times being allowed to stay if<br>
> they can find just a single patsy to vote for them. One of the concessions<br>
> that was made at the meeting was that only members would be able to<br>
> banhammer a harasser. We also had to accept a trial time period instead of<br>
> a permanent policy and agree that it wouldn't be allowed to be implemented<br>
> retroactively to get it passed. I'm not a fan of those concessions, but<br>
> given that there were not one but two literal rapists at that meeting, I<br>
> think we did pretty well for ourselves.<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Danny O'Brien <<a href="mailto:danny@spesh.com">danny@spesh.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> There are no privileges to membership, apart from blocking (and a<br>
>> currently entirely theoretical first dibs on hacker shelves). Anyone<br>
>> can ask anyone to leave. Or at least, that used to be the case.<br>
>><br>
>> I'm a bit disturbed that the direction we're taking seem to be taking<br>
>> powers *away* from visitors to Noisebridge.<br>
>><br>
>> d.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Hannah Grimm <<a href="mailto:dharlette@gmail.com">dharlette@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> wrote:<br>
>> > Because the anti-harassment policy predates the associate members<br>
>> > existence,<br>
>> > and I don't know the rules around associate members well. Did the<br>
>> > meeting<br>
>> > in which we created them give them all the privileges of NB membership<br>
>> > EXCEPT the block, or did it specifically just give them the ability to<br>
>> > be in<br>
>> > the space? If it's the former, then any member would be able to remove<br>
>> > them. This would be nice, since there should (theoretically) always be<br>
>> > a<br>
>> > member in the space anytime we have people there.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Danny O'Brien <<a href="mailto:danny@spesh.com">danny@spesh.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Why does it need a "capital M" member?<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Hannah Grimm <<a href="mailto:dharlette@gmail.com">dharlette@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >> wrote:<br>
>> >> > "Trolling" is a deceptively benign term. If anyone sees someone put<br>
>> >> > up<br>
>> >> > similar fliers again, please grab a capital-M-member and have them<br>
>> >> > ask<br>
>> >> > that<br>
>> >> > person to leave and never come back. This behavior is clearly<br>
>> >> > covered<br>
>> >> > by<br>
>> >> > our anti-harassment policy, and as a result doesn't require consensus<br>
>> >> > to<br>
>> >> > ban.<br>
>> >> ><br>
>> >> ><br>
>> >> > On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Al Sweigart <<a href="mailto:asweigart@gmail.com">asweigart@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >> > wrote:<br>
>> >> >><br>
>> >> >> "It's nothing bitch shut up" isn't well-meaning, it's just trolling.<br>
>> >> >> Take<br>
>> >> >> the flyer down, toss it, and continue hacking. But do message the<br>
>> >> >> list<br>
>> >> >> again<br>
>> >> >> if this anonymous coward keeps putting them up.<br>
>> >> >><br>
>> >> >> -Al<br>
>> >> >><br>
>> >> >><br>
>> >> >> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 3:43 PM, johny radio <<a href="mailto:johnyradio@gmail.com">johnyradio@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >> >> wrote:<br>
>> >> >>><br>
>> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Jake <<a href="mailto:jake@spaz.org">jake@spaz.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >> >>>><br>
>> >> >>>> i'm wondering if this person was some well-meaning activist trying<br>
>> >> >>>> to<br>
>> >> >>>> start a discussion.<br>
>> >> >>><br>
>> >> >>><br>
>> >> >>> or trying to set a honey trap. Yes, i agree with you Jake.<br>
>> >> >>><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">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> >> >><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">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
>> >> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
><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">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><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">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
</p>