<html><head></head><body><div>Dude what do you think the Reboot was about. Noisebridge passed electrical inspection. And fire safety. Quit spreading FUD, if you please.<br><br><div class="acompli_signature">Jeffrey</div><br></div><br><br><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 5:38 PM -0800, "subbes" <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:subbes@gmail.com" target="_blank">subbes@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="3D"ltr"">
<pre>So will we be pointing everyone in the direction of Tech Shop when
Noisebridge fails an electrical inspection and gets shut down?
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Rubin Abdi <rubin@starset.net> wrote:
> https://noisebridge.net/index.php?title=Do-ocracy&oldid=11433
>
> Do-ocracy is a process in which people decide to do things on their own, no
> permission necessary. Considering there isn't anyone as Noisebridge who has
> any authority to give permission, the logic is then that anyone is allowed
> to give permission to you, including yourself.
>
> Kyle tried using a thing at Noisebridge. Kyle found said thing to be broken.
> Kyle decided to do-ocractically attempt to fix thing. Kyle was unsuccessful.
> Kyle is now being excellent by politely letting the list know about all
> this.
>
> Kyle did all the right things.
>
> Hackers learn by taking things apart and breaking stuff. That's what
> Noisebridge is for. If anyone tells you otherwise please point them in the
> direction of the Tech Shop.
>
>
> On 17 January 2016 at 22:24, Josh Juran <jjuran@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 17, 2016, at 6:33 PM, Henner Zeller <h.zeller@acm.org> wrote:
>>
>> > On 17 January 2016 at 15:07, <ng.kyle@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Hey sorry I understand but I determined that it was a do-ocratically
>> >> excellent thing to do at the time. Lesson learned.
>> >
>> > It is perfectly excellent, just make sure to fix with the right fuse
>> > to not verschlimmbessern it (German expression for: attempting to
>> > improve something but making it worse in the process).
>>
>> I'm going to recommend that people stop describing do-ocracy as meaning
>> that you should "just do" a thing without asking permission. My observation
>> is that this idea is harmful.
>>
>> Instead, consider that do-ocracy means that the answer to "who's supposed
>> to do X?" (where X is something currently going undone) is whomever is
>> asking the question. That doesn't mean that X is a good idea, that the
>> community has consensed on it, or that people won't be upset if X is done
>> (or attempted unsuccessfully). It only means that you shouldn't expect
>> someone else to do it for you.
>>
>> Josh
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
>
>
> --
> Rubin
> rubin@starset.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net
https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
</ng.kyle@gmail.com></h.zeller@acm.org></jjuran@gmail.com></rubin@starset.net></pre>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body></html>