[Noisebridge-discuss] Deep Crack

[Ceren Ercen]

TL;DR summary:
- I'd like NB able to host some loaned things.
- Insurance won't "let" us, can we fix that?
- Deep Crack's problematic for more than just that reason.


Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
> Jeffrey Malone wrote:
>> However, I object to it being at Noisebridge, as it violates our
>> current policies which you yourself have vehemently defended, and
>> leaves us open to a large amount of liability.
> 
> So does this mean that you've decided that it's not OK for people to
> host large objects at the space that do not fit on the shelf?
> 
> The discussion from last night about Rachel's hypothetical large
> furniture sized sewing machine seem relevant here. Is there a grey area
> about some things?

It is relevant, and as I recall, you were snorting at how anyone who 
didn't "get Noisebridge's way of doing things" could think any sort of 
loaner equipment was a "good idea". You even called us out, asking 
anyone who disagreed with what you'd just stated to out themselves by 
raising their hands in front of the whole membership.

I certainly wanted to say that I felt it was sad that we were not 
allowing ourselves any sort of wiggle room for loans of fun and 
interesting equipment, but I felt some serious derision coming from your 
corner.

...perhaps I was imagining it.

To clarify:

1) I would LOVE Noisebridge to be somehow able to host loans. (I even 
raised my hand.)

2) As far as I could tell, you clearly opposed loaned equipment until 
Deep Crack wasn't going to be a free-and-clear donation. Is this 
different because there simply will never be a chance to "hold out for a 
no-strings-attached" version?


3) And then on TOP of all of this, i feel we really cannot afford to 
avoid "our insurance doesn't cover our asses if any loaned equipment 
falls over and squishes someone's 6-year-old kid / sews their hand to 
the table / cooks your nads". If we host loaned things, we need to 
update our insurance policy somehow, and insurance isn't something you 
can "address  if and when a problem actually comes up."


> Do you interpret our current policies as "no personal possessions in the
> space even during limited projects" or am I reading that wrong?
> 
> The discussion of liability is perhaps only relevant if we can even
> bring the thing into the space.
> 
> Best,
> Jake

No, it's relevant Right Now, because otherwise it may be 
full-steam-ahead. Do-ocracy and all that. Also, this Loaner Equipment 
Question isn't going to go away.

Perhaps it's good to talk about it in advance to avoid jerking around 
both the "donor" (or lender) and the members/visitors who aren't willing 
to risk their in-country statuses or visas to play chicken games with a 
temperamental INS. It's entirely possible they'd have to /prove/ they 
weren't around the machine at any point, because immigration doesn't 
play burden-of-proof games. Gov't is a jerk like that.

 > Have we become a space where for each project, we must justify and sell
 > every project to every member? That seems like it's not the case. It
 > would be quite sad if it was so.

I think that's called "consensus", especially when it exposes us to 
legal risk, cost, may fuck over other members, or makes our insurance 
invalid.

Also IIRC bringing equipment, supervised or not, into the space isn't a 
member-restricted privilege.

A time frame certainly goes a long way towards mitigating the space 
issues, but occupied floor space is only about 20% of the problem here. 
This is definitely your DIYBioFridge, and I DO feel we were unexcellent 
to bounce that thing out of 83c, regardless of whether a particular 
member was driving us nuts.

If we have a committee that will work out what is necessary to allow us 
to cover our asses while bringing loaned equipment in, I want on it. I 
will read boring legal documentation till my eyes bleed.

- Ceren