[Noisebridge-discuss] Access to the calendar?

[Jacob Appelbaum]

Josh Myer wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 01:31:14PM -0700, Ani Niow wrote:
>> The calendar currently on SWARM looks like it only displays the date and not
>> what's happening on that date, maybe that's why it fell into disuse. I'm
>> liking the extensibility of the Kenyu73 one and am really surprised that we
>> don't have one like that already. Google Calendar is cumbersome and it
>> depends on one person to grant privileges which is an unnecessary burden
> 
> FWIW, there are currently 8 people who can add people to the calendar,
> and, when they add them, those peole can add people to the calendar.
> In fact, yesterday, there were only 6, and Skory added two more admins
> this morning.  It does suck that you need to have a google account to
> use it, but that's pretty common for most web services out there.
> 
> I honestly don't use gCal for anything but the noisebridge calendar.
> The only reason I have a google account is to use gReader (and, more
> recently, gCode, because there isn't a reliable and responsive SVN
> hosting provider out there).
> 
> It would be great to get something on the wiki, but I'd be hesistant
> to use it because no one seems interested in committing to being the
> wiki maintainer.  For instance: the occasional requests for new
> filetypes on the wiki, which never get handled.  Personally, I would
> move the wiki over to PBwiki or some such, and put the files up in
> dropbox or some other service.  There's something to be said for
> externalizing maintenance, even if it comes at the cost of some
> flexiblity.

I disagree. There are many wiki maintainers, I'm one of them. I don't
add new file types to the wiki because the requests are often on the
discuss list and they're often for hosting files that are probably best
not hosted on our wiki. User created files? Perhaps. Copyrighted
documents produced by some company that might send a C&D? No thanks.

So to get to my point, the request was handled by not adding arbitrary
file types to the wiki. It probably would have elicited a reply someone
had written me directly and asked. The discuss list isn't the
ops at noisebridge or any of the other long standing server op email
addresses. root@ works too, obviously.

Generally, we shy away from hosted services because they lock in data.
If the lead of that service fades away from Noisebridge, we too may
become locked out of the data. That's why Andy and I both share the main
noisebridge server administration duties, it's also why it's kept mostly
up to date and runs almost all of the services we offer (dns, web, mail,
Tor, etc).

I'd say we're doing just fine. If people want to start hosting services
for Noisebridge, they should step up and make them. I imagine though
they'll get a lot of push back if they don't have the ability to run the
service themselves. To be clear, that isn't about skill per se, it's
usually about time and dedication.

How long is a widget going to last if you're only making a widget
because foo.com makes widgets easy?

>> IMO, especially when we have an entire wiki at our disposal, not to mention
>> not everyone (like me) uses Google calendar.
>> I'd be willing to take the reins and experiment with it if I can get access
>> to install the plugin, hint hint...
> 
> Not to pick on Ani, but the fileserver/jukebox experience should serve
> as a cautionary tale here: without some form of responsibility, things
> won't get fixed.  When things fail, infrastructure people depend on
> disappears for a while, and it needs to be restored.  Using a free
> external service puts the niggly bits of restoration on the provider
> (even though it's free), who is likely to take care of it, even when
> they're really busy with other projects.  And then there's the
> less-niggly things, like adding new users, updating events, etc, which
> can be done by just about anyone (since the service is for Normals).
> This is part of why I've been handing out admin privileges to the gCal
> like candy: it distributes responsiblity for the non-technical
> maintenance, so I'm never a bottleneck.

I take away a totally different moral from that story. People didn't
care enough to fix it. It's not about responsibility, it's about the
desire to do something other than complain. When people hem and haw
about things, it's often because that level of bike shedding is all they
can contribute.

You use words like 'need' and 'infrastructure' but we're talking about a
stereo here. Anyone can plug in their laptop to the amp. Or the four
other half stereo things on the shelf. Rubin even set up two different
stereos at one point. We don't need some kind of person responsible for
fixing the stereo other than the person or people who want to listen to
some music at the time.

We don't need structure, we need to destroy the need for structures!

With a great love for chaos,
Jake