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

[Al Billings]

Personally, I wish we just voted on things. One member, one vote. All  
this other process is overly complex. I figure if my Masonic lodge can  
run it's system on voting and officers since the 1600's, maybe they  
have a good idea that works.

Al



On Jun 2, 2009, at 7:40 PM, Jacob Appelbaum <jacob at appelbaum.net> wrote:

> Ceren Ercen wrote:
>> Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
>>>
>>> We have a process (that you seem unfamiliar with; correct me if I'm
>>> mistaken) for asking a trusted proxy to speak up for you. Does  
>>> that not
>>> work for you? In any case, I'm obviously in favor of anonymity but  
>>> it
>>> would be useful to reduce or increase your anonymity set by  
>>> telling us
>>> why and how we should care.
>>>
>>> Lots of people shout that we as a group should do things. When  
>>> that's
>>> their only known input, regardless of their suggestion, it often  
>>> falls
>>> between the cracks.
>>
>>
>> I'll step up and say I think this implementation of anonymity is a
>> non-starter.
>>
>> This idea of a "trusted proxy" just muddies a communication by
>> subjecting it to a game of telephone AND lag in response. "uh, I'll  
>> ask
>> them about that" leads to dragging a topic out and burying it in
>> slow-moving mud, shaming the person who's bringing it up AND their
>> proxy-speaker through having to manually haul it back to the surface
>> each iteration/meeting.
>>
>
> I totally disagree with you here. It gives someone an opportunity to
> express concern or issues with the group without revealing  
> themselves to
> an entire group. If you can't get a single person to stand up for you,
> you're possibly going to need to trade some anonymity away because  
> your
> needs in a dire situation.
>
> How can people raise concerns in a privacy conscious manner in front  
> of
> the group without the use of a proxy?
>
> Please offer an alternative?
>
>> Anonymous comments that're still weighted by whether the "anonymous"
>> party's opinion should matter because of.... how cool they are? ...  
>> how
>> influential or respected of a proxy they can arm-twist into  
>> whinging for
>> them?
>>
>
> What? Yeah, if Andy, Rachel, David, Dan, etc is a proxy for someone,
> that really speaks highly of their need. As an example, I trust Rachel
> and the transitive trust property of that relationship is what can  
> keep
> the proxy system from being abused.
>
>> Suggestions about ideas without a personality behind them only fall  
>> into
>> cracks when our only-human focus on outgoing personalities drowns  
>> them
>> out. my btardedness may be showing here, but karma/postcount/signup  
>> date
>> seems to outweigh idea merit too often.
>
> Contributions matter perhaps most of all. That's why I think it's
> important to discuss single bit values, such as membership; if  
> they're a
> member, that's really important to a space that values it's membership
> over the general whims of the largely uninvolved public. If they're a
> member, they're welcome to use the proxy system to help preserve their
> privacy _and_ ensure that their voice is heard in a largely neutral  
> manner.
>
> Best,
> Jake
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss