[Noisebridge-discuss] Regarding discussion about ownership from the Tuesday meeting, 20091117

[Rubin Abdi]

I really really don't want to beat a dead horse here, but I just wanted 
to make one thing clear. After reviewing the notes I ran into this 
question and answer...

 > Q. Why wasn't there a mailing list post when the darkroom builders
 > decided that the couch was a problem, in order to explain what
 > happened? A. The darkroom builders tried in person to figure out who
 > put the couch up and to explain their concern, but they didn't manage
 > to do so.

About an hour after the couch came down the first time I ran into one 
person who admitted that they had put the couch up there and asked why 
we removed it. I listed off my concerns...

* New light leaks created with weight actively being moved around on the 
roof.
* Safety concerns since the last time I checked the roof wasn't actually 
attached to any studs.
* Extreme close proximity to a sprinkler head (of which Kelly, Andy and 
myself had bumped into trying to move the couch around earlier in the 
night).
* We weren't even done with build out of the roof let alone the rest of 
darkroom, putting stuff up there hinders our ability to continue working.

I told said person that the first three points could be counted as 
personal opinions, and that there actually isn't much in the way of me 
stopping them from putting the couch up there. But I did ask them to 
please not put it or anything else like that back up there until we were 
done with build out of the darkroom.

So to correctly answer that question from the meeting, yes communication 
was made as to why we removed it and a request to not actively do 
anything else on the roof till we were done was delivered.

If you would like to continue active discussion about this, please hit 
the *Reply* button and not reply-all. Thanks.

-- 
Rubin Abdi
rubin at starset.net