<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif">Kevin, </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif">No one said Folsom prison for naptime.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif">
<br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif"> Are you - or are you not, going to include prohibiting sleeping at Noisebridge in your version of the house rules.?</div></div><div class="gmail_extra">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Kevin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bfb@riseup.net" target="_blank">bfb@riseup.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On March 19, 2014 11:45:24 AM PDT, Gregory Dillon <<a href="mailto:gregorydillon@gmail.com">gregorydillon@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Tthe meeting notes say<br>
> Kevin is willing to accept prohibiting sleeping at Noisebridge,<br>
> - Will that be part of your proposal?<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kevin <<a href="mailto:bfb@riseup.net">bfb@riseup.net</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> > On March 19, 2014 11:07:24 AM PDT, Jessica Ross<br>
> <<a href="mailto:jessica.r.ross@gmail.com">jessica.r.ross@gmail.com</a>><br>
> > wrote:<br>
> > > Why can't you guys rebut this with "It's against the terms of the<br>
> > > lease and<br>
> > > could get us evicted"?<br>
> > ><br>
> > > It's BS that you're even still debating this!<br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Al Sweigart<br>
> <<a href="mailto:asweigart@gmail.com">asweigart@gmail.com</a>><br>
> > > wrote:<br>
> > ><br>
> > > > Kevin is against banning sleeping at the space because he and<br>
> his<br>
> > > friends<br>
> > > > like to sleep at the space. He helped build the "hacker stacker"<br>
> > > bunk beds<br>
> > > > that were in the space which, unsurprisingly, were used for more<br>
> > > than just<br>
> > > > short naps in the space.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Kevin will single-handedly block any measure to ban sleeping<br>
> without<br>
> > > > compromise, because consensus lets him do this. He is against<br>
> any<br>
> > > actual<br>
> > > > punitive consequences because he knows that even if people are<br>
> woken<br>
> > > up and<br>
> > > > told not to sleep at the space, they can just do so again the<br>
> next<br>
> > > night<br>
> > > > (or just later that same morning).<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Hey, if the majority of Noisebridge members said they were fine<br>
> with<br>
> > > > people sleeping at the space, I would back down on my stance.<br>
> > > Whereas Kevin<br>
> > > > will barge in on a meeting an hour late and then get his way.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > The thing that gets me is that he doesn't even have to publicly<br>
> > > defend his<br>
> > > > unpopular view in order to get his way. (Note that he didn't<br>
> mention<br>
> > > > sleeping at all in his email on this thread, even though that's<br>
> the<br>
> > > > elephant in the room.) All he has to do is keep saying "there<br>
> needs<br>
> > > to more<br>
> > > > discussion" week after week until the issue fades into the<br>
> > > background once<br>
> > > > more.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Kevin Schiesser<br>
> <<a href="mailto:bfb@riseup.net">bfb@riseup.net</a>><br>
> > > wrote:<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > >> Brandon Edens:<br>
> > > >> > Hi all,<br>
> > > >> ><br>
> > > >> > The consensus of Noisebridge is that we have some house<br>
> rules.<br>
> > > You can<br>
> > > >> read<br>
> > > >> > about them here...<br>
> > > >> ><br>
> > > >><br>
> > ><br>
> ><br>
> <a href="https://github.com/noisebridge/bureaucracy/blob/master/rules/house-rules.md" target="_blank">https://github.com/noisebridge/bureaucracy/blob/master/rules/house-rules.md</a><br>
> > > >> ><br>
> > > >> > Enjoy!<br>
> > > >> > Brandon<br>
> > > >> ><br>
> > > >> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > > >> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
> > > >> > <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
> > > >> ><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>
> > > >> I barged into the open meeting an hour late tonight and<br>
> rejected<br>
> > > the<br>
> > > >> civility of passing this proposal, given I had aired<br>
> unaddressed<br>
> > > >> concerns. Discussion on the proposal was reopened, hence<br>
> > > Noisebridge has<br>
> > > >> not come to consensus on 'house rules'.<br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >> I will be preparing an alternative draft. If anyone wants to<br>
> > > >> collaborate, contact me via email or let's work though github.<br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >> Generally, I favor 'community agreements'. I oppose punitive<br>
> > > measures,<br>
> > > >> and do not believe punitive measure will positively transform<br>
> > > Noisebridge.<br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >> If agreements are to be codified, we should start with the most<br>
> > > >> abundantly clear agreements... We agree not to attempt to<br>
> repair<br>
> > > the<br>
> > > >> elevator, not to go on the roof (unless maintenancing an<br>
> antenna),<br>
> > > not<br>
> > > >> to go in the basement, not to go on the fire escape, not to<br>
> live at<br>
> > > >> Noisebridge. We also agree that projects kept on the hacker<br>
> shelves<br>
> > > in<br>
> > > >> the SW corner of the space or kept in personal lockers belong<br>
> to<br>
> > > >> participants in the community and are not for general purpose<br>
> > > hacking.<br>
> > > >> <Add your own agreement>.<br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >> -Kevin<br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >><br>
> > > >> _______________________________________________<br>
> > > >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
> > > >> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
> > > >><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>
> > > ><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>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > --<br>
> > > Jessica R. Ross<br>
> > > <a href="mailto:jessica.r.ross@gmail.com">jessica.r.ross@gmail.com</a><br>
> ><br>
> > I'm very open to collaborating on a revised Draft of this document.<br>
> > Please read the meeting notes or try to understand what I wrote<br>
> before<br>
> > jumping in with critique. Polarization, accusation, and hyperbole<br>
> are not<br>
> > effective.<br>
> ><br>
> > For context...<br>
> ><br>
> > At every prior meeting I said that I had concerns with the house<br>
> rules<br>
> > proposal. Often, the agenda was too full of bannings to have<br>
> substantive<br>
> > discussion of my concerns. I was shocked to arrive late and hear<br>
> consensus<br>
> > was reached without having had opportunity for discussion. The group<br>
> agreed<br>
> > I was previously misunderstood, the proposal is not urgent, and that<br>
> more<br>
> > discussion is needed.<br>
> ><br>
> > Hence more discussion and reaching out to the community.<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>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Let's stay in touch. Greg<br>
<br>
</div></div>I'm ideologically opposed to criminalizing sleep at Noisebride. Many organizations understand the benefits of rest, and allow sleep to occur alongside work/hacking/creating.<br>
<br>
I recognize Noisebridge has problems Many have identified sleep as one. I maintain its a symptom and not a root problem. However, I'm open to experiments. We tried HackerStackers... If folks want to try prohibition, I won't stand in the way.<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Let's stay in touch. Greg
</div>