[Noisebridge-discuss] a bit csonfused - no keys

[Jonathan Lassoff]

There is already some talk and ideas floating around on the wiki - https://www.noisebridge.net/index.php/AccessSystem

I'm also interested in helping with / following along with the implementation of this.
I'm in favor of having some flavor of a pseudo-anonymous access control for the space.

It sounds like finding some of the actual hardware for the system needs to be done first.

Cheers,
jonathan

On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 01:00:40PM -0700, daniela Steinsapir wrote:
>  I understand, I think that the keys should be given to people that are
> going to be members only or you can give now some limited temporarily access
> for people to help out or something in between.
> 
>  Do you know about smart keys  (electronic key, I apologize if somebody
> posted this already)  with those  you can give access or take access if the
> person leaves.   You can keep track to see who entered if necessary. But
> maybe is expensive and a hassle....
> 
> D
> 
> 
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Jacob Appelbaum <jacob at appelbaum.net>wrote:
> 
> > Rachel McConnell wrote:
> > > We have erred.  At the meeting last night there was discussion about
> > > giving anyone a key who wanted it, but this morning after consideration,
> > > I am not comfortable with that.
> > >
> > > Let me be very clear, here: I am speaking now not as a board member of
> > > Noisebridge, but as an individual who has signed the lease and has full
> > > personal responsibility for the space.  We are not, yet, quite, a real
> > > organization so I am, personally, responsible.
> > >
> > > Please do not give anyone any keys who has not signed the lease, until
> > > we are a legal organization that can take responsibility.
> > >
> > > Feel free to bitch at me about this but please don't give out keys yet.
> > >
> >
> > Consider this me bitching. :-)
> >
> > We made a consensus last night. If we want to change that, we're going
> > to need to do that together, I think (and so we have all agreed). There
> > are a number of people in the mission who should have keys (paying
> > members that are well known to us). Those members that come to mind are
> > Seth Schoen, Shannon and Grey at the very least. All have offered to
> > bring supplies, to work and have kicked in significant contributions.
> >
> > Regardless of how comfortable any of us are with the subject in
> > general... I do not think it is fair for one or two people to block the
> > entire group on a whim without discussion after we had HOURS of
> > discussions last night.
> >
> > I'm speaking as an individual who signed the lease and has full personal
> > responsibility. I'm also speaking as a (board/normal/whatever)
> > Noisebridge member who felt that we reached consensus last night.
> >
> > I think we can come to a middle ground by doing a few things:
> >    1) Discuss on the board list the people who we feel comfortable
> > giving keys
> >    1a) People who have contributed a significant amount (of money and
> > effort) and who we know well
> >    2) We should discuss the kinds of activities we should avoid until
> > we're insured and a full legal org.
> >    2a) Please no fire art or complex chemistry until we're insured!
> >
> > Does this seem reasonable to everyone?
> >
> > I personally do not want to have a willynilly flip flopping board of
> > directors dictatorship. We explicitly wanted to avoid anything like that
> > from happening. I won't be ordering anyone around and I do not find it
> > acceptable for other people to take that kind of action.
> >
> > Unless there's an immediate physical danger, I do not feel like anyone
> > should be bossing anyone around, especially after we have reached
> > consensus on an issue. If it is felt that we haven't reached consensus,
> > I think it's totally reasonable to block and wait on an issue. This is
> > sticky if Noah feels that he wasn't heard. It's especially difficult
> > when someone backs out later. Neither are impossible but are certainly
> > damaging to the credibility of our leadership being reasonable and
> > consistent.
> >
> > With that said, I am happy to commit to discussing key issues in the
> > open. I'm totally willing to accept a block on this as long as we can
> > open a discussion about it. Specifically with the understanding that I'm
> > not going to go make copies for _anyone_ without discussion and
> > agreement from a majority of the lease holders.
> >
> > Best,
> > Jake
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> www.danielast.com

> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss