[Noisebridge-discuss] FOSS/H in the mission statement

[Rachel McConnell]

People who are having people review the Bylaws: do the reviewers have 
the bylaws now?  It's probably not a good idea to modify them while 
they're being officially reviewed, however good the modification is.

At least, we should make sure to point out each particular change so the 
reviewer does not miss it (and obviously this shouldn't happen more than 
once or twice).

Specific to the mission statement parts.  Should we have a slightly 
larger change and refer in our Bylaws to an external Mission Statement 
document, or keep all mission statements in the Bylaws where they'll 
have to be amended by an act of the Board?  If the answer to that is, 
eh, leave them in the Bylaws, we're gonna do whatever we want anyway - 
then Andy, I think it's probably not worth adding the FOSS language.

Rachel

Andy Isaacson wrote:
> It just occurred to me that we should explicitly mention free/open
> source software and hardware in our bylaw's Mission section.  In
> particluar, if the space is amenable, I would like Noisebridge to
> support
>  - development of open drivers for various hardware
>  - reverse engineering (for purposes of compatibility) of interfaces as
>    necessary for driver support
>  - development of software in the public interest (such as Tor)
>  - development of open hardware a la opencores.org
> 
> I've added a bullet to
> https://www.noisebridge.net/index.php/Bylaws#ARTICLE_I_NAME.2C_MISSION.2C_AND_OFFICES
> for discussion purposes.  Thoughts?
> 
> -andy
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss