[Noisebridge-discuss] adult themed posters in a do-acracy

[Jacob Appelbaum]

njc4523 wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Jacob Appelbaum <jacob at appelbaum.net> wrote:
> 
>> I am certain that there is some dissent. However, it's a tough call. Is
>> the steam powered dildo displaying adult material? Or is it just the
>> posters? There is also a very strong culture of so called adult issues.
> 
> I don't view the dildo as part of the space as perhaps the decor is.
> I can escape the dildo, but the hanging artwork is omnipresent.
> 

I'm not sure that is a safe assumption to be made.

> 
>> Noisebridge is a confusing space socially. Some number of people
>> involved have worked in the sex industry and many continue to do so.
>>
>> Will we, as a group, need to tone down their projects and their
>> interests in the space?
> 
> No, I'm not advocating that.

Which of the posters are you advocating removing? I am certain that the
posters on the wall are part of projects related to people at Noisebridge.

> 
> 
>>> Jeffrey, thanks for your thoughtful response.  The posters have been
>>> an issue for me for a while, but it's only the recent thread about
>>> kids in NB that made my thoughts on this take full form.  I was
>>> introduced to hacking as a kid by a mentor I'm eternally thankful to,
>>> and I'd like to do the same for a child I serve as a role model to.
>>> I'm not comfortable exposing her to adult material though.  I
>>> personally don't care about profanity, and she's exposed to plenty of
>>> that, but neither I nor her mother want her exposed to adult material
>>> of a sexual nature.
>>>
>> That's a totally reasonable concern. I'm curious and I ask this with all
>>  the respect possible: Why do you wish to bring her to Noisebridge
>> knowing that we have adult themed material around?
> 
> In my perfect world, there'd be nothing at NB which would keep away
> parents and others concerned about the welfare of children.  If
> keeping the posters up is a foregone conclusion, the my interest in
> bringing a kid there disappears.
> 

You're making a pretty big jump here, aren't you? There are lots of
parents concerned about the welfare of their children involved with
Noisebridge. You're still leaving the content you find objectionable
undefined and as such, I can only guess at the specific content that's
bugging you.

> 
>> I sense that you like some parts of the group but wish to adapt the rest
>> of the group to your other needs. This indicates to me that you're
>> unfamiliar with how Noisebridge works.
> 
> Very true.  I've never been involved with a do-ocracy and was
> wondering how things work in practical terms.  I think I know enough
> now to have an informed opinion on it.
> 

In practical terms: Get engaged!

> 
>> How is it not an appropriate place for such material? Because you've
>> said so? Because society at large says so? I am honestly curious and I
>> invite you to reply. Or if you'd like, bring it up at the meeting
>> tomorrow as a discussion point?
> 
> As much as I hate to say this, I think my answer is that community
> standards dictate what's acceptable and what's not.  If NB were a
> democracy, a simple vote about the issue would resolve the matter.
> We'd know what the group considered acceptable.  However, in a
> do-ocracy things are a little murkier.

NB isn't a democracy for a number of reasons. Democracy can make many
people very unhappy with a simple majority (though this is an
implementation issue, I suppose). Democracy doesn't ensure that everyone
is heard. Also, Noisebridge isn't _just_ a do-ocracy, that's a neat term
that encompasses only part of our group. We're a consensus driven
organization and as such, I think it's _very_ reasonable to understand
what you're talking about. Please do feel free to elaborate on the
specific things that are bugging you if you'd like. We as a group with
or without you can discuss it.

Your seemingly vague relationship to the group, our processes and the
space indicate not being a member. If this is the case, it means that
you're not welcome to block consensus. It doesn't however suggest that
you can't find a member who cares and ask them to be a proxy for the
conversation. If you do this, you should be ensuring your anonymity to a
reasonable degree and it adds some credibility (someone's going on the
line for you) to you when interfacing with the group.

If you can't find a member to proxy, you're probably going to have a
hard time both expressing your concerns and staying anonymous.

Additionally, as you may have noticed, the posters are on the wall. This
should give you an idea as to what the group as a whole considers
acceptable pre-vote. No one has bothered to remove them or brought the
issue to the consensus portion of a meeting.

Best,
Jake