[Noisebridge-discuss] MonkeyBrains donates a new uplink to Noisebridge

[Christie Dudley]

See, here is where I'm confused.  There are actions taken every day "in the
name of Noisebridge" as people tell their friends and new cool people they
meet about us.  Do we need to have each of these interactions approved?  No?

So what happened here was a subset of us accepted a donation.  Does the
action of accepting a donation require consensus?  We're supposed to turn
potential donors away or put them on hold until we've aired it for a couple
of weeks and talked about the pros and cons of accepting things.

Although I've actually seen this happen, I believe it's bad for the group as
a whole as we're exceptionally good at picking each other apart.  We will
effectively choke ourselves off from all resources if we continue to play
this game.

What Ani's original post fails to acknowledge is that nobody made any
commitments for anything in the name of Noisebridge.  Although it implies
differently, there's nothing else that happened here.

Christie

---
Why I take the road less traveled?  Oh, that's easy.  I'm claustrophobic.


On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 11:27 AM, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:

>
>   seems clear and good to me: i don't care to know
> about much: before action is taken on behalf or in
> the name of noisebridge, the plans for the action
> should be opened for discussion.
>   with respect to actions not in the name of or on
> behalf of noisebridge per se, i would only care if
> they were interesting to me personally, and then
> grateful to those who'd let me in on things. the
> more people tell me, the greater the pool of
> possibilities from which i can choose. i'm up for
> hearing about anything (as long as i can walk away
> from the conversation when i'm bored). i generally
> announce whatever i'm up to on the list and then
> continue on.
>   as to the criticisms of others, seems to me the
> best course is to develop thick, fire-proof skin--
> let 'em bitch and don't let it bother you.
>   it would be nice if criticisms were generally
> deprecated: if you don't like something, focus on
> what you do like and don't make things unpleasant
> for others; and don't encourage others' criticisms.
>
>
>
> On Sun, 2009-11-29 at 00:53 -0800, Rubin Abdi wrote:
> > jim wrote, On 20091128 205549:
> > >     my concern is that people might be secretive
> > > about taking actions in the name of or on behalf
> > > of noisebridge. before action is taken, issues
> > > should be made plain and open for discussion. i
> > > would like to know about risks of accepting a
> > > gift, if there are some.
> > >     that people are discrete about making plans is
> > > not of much interest to me.
> >
> > One of the most lovely things about Noisebridge, I find, is being able
> > to do things discreetly, without inviting criticism or the input of
> > others. If I knew about everything going on, there wouldn't opportunity
> > to be surprised. Things would get boring rather quickly. If everyone
> > else had to know about everything I was doing, I wouldn't have time to
> > get things to a finishes state.
> >
> > Be mindful of what you're actually asking for here.
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20091129/d2197c46/attachment-0003.html>