[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge has a (potentially) newcommunication medium: The Noisebridge ning network!

[Christie Dudley]

All these other issues aside, I'm not seeing a very good argument for using
this.  It sounds like a solution in need of a problem to me.  I am not
seeing any functionality in that site that might need that we don't already
have.

We can host whatever we want as we've had a lot of stuff donated, so choose
carefully, based on need, exactly which non-controlled-by-noisebridge
services we use.  Each has a very specific use case driven by a real need.
I'm just not seeing any need that we have to use ning.

I'm sure it's a very nice service.  I fail to see what it will buy us,
though, except one more thing for members to have to keep up on to know
what's going on.

Christie
_______
Getting to the bottom of the hill is convenient. The view from the top of
the hill is stunning. Where would you choose to live?


On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 4:26 AM, Noise Bridge <noisebridgening at gmail.com>wrote:

> to the concerns about my trustworthiness would it be acceptable to give
> full admin rights to the BoD's? the full admin abilities mirror the creators
> abilities in all but three respects: the ability to have the final say on
> removing and altering powers of any admin rank created, the ability to
> purchase premium services (like getting rid of the ads or adding special
> featrues), and the 'delete network' button. I'm also willing to divulge my
> identity solely to the BoD's on the condition they don't repeat it if this
> helps the community feel that the site is more trustworthy to use.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20091220/23c19703/attachment-0003.html>