[Noisebridge-discuss] Sleeping at NB

Shannon Lee shannon at scatter.com
Fri Dec 24 16:09:00 UTC 2010


This is the traffic light problem -- you've got a bunch of people at a
corner waiting to cross.  There is a system of rules about when it's ok to
cross, embodied in the walking man / stopping hand light.  Occasionally,
some adventurous person just goes ahead and crosses the street when it seems
appropriate, and everybody else follows.  So, two models for social
permission: rules-based, and leadership based.

It seems to me that Noisebridge is stuck standing on the corner: we don't
have the "go" light of a set of rules, and we're stuck waiting for
adventurous souls to just step out into traffic -- but we can't actually
*ask* then to do so by anything so prosaic as electing them, we just hope
someone does something interesting that everybody will follow.

It may seem depressing to people who think of themselves as self-actuallized
and motivated and whatnot, but most people require some form of social
permission in order to do stuff.  If it's not built into the social DNA,
it's certainly beaten in there by socialization.  If we don't have a
mechanism for asking the group whether it's OK to do something, we aren't,
by and large, going to do it.

Thus, mostly at Noisebridge either nothing gets done or it feels like a
sneak-around, except by people who either have a great deal of social
capital or are just socially tone-deaf -- the emergence of "strong man"
leadership.  No rules exist except social convention, which requires a
series of tiresome shouting matches in order to change.

So, we have leaders and we have rules, but neither of them are very
effective, and neither of them are within the group's power to change.

I'm not standing for re-election to the board, so I feel comfortable
advocating this:  I think we should have a set of rules ("no sleeping at
noisebridge") that are written down in a central place, which we can change
if we need to.  I think we should have elected leadership that is
responsible for making sure things get done, and that they should take their
jobs seriously (as opposed to the current model of simply electing people
who take Noisebridge seriously to positions of authority, and then claiming
that they're not really in charge).  I think we should have voting so that
we can easily change the above if it's not working.

If we're not going to do all of the above, we should at least pick one.

The above system works for the vast majority of organizations in the US, at
least.  It is the default that people expect when they walk in the door, and
so the least expensive in terms of training and enculturation.  It means, I
think, that we're taking "getting giant robots built" more seriously than
the ongoing political experiment.

--S

On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 1:55 AM, Jacob Appelbaum <jacob at appelbaum.net>wrote:

> On 12/23/2010 01:39 PM, Moxie Marlinspike wrote:
> >
> > On 12/23/2010 01:09 AM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
> >>> And unfortunately there are things about noisebridge which make hacking
> >>> the motherfucking planet something you'd rather do somewhere else.
> >>
> >> I think it would be awesome if you would list some of those here. I have
> >> a really hard time getting upset about someone sleeping on a sofa. what
> >> is the impact to me programming or reading? Perhaps that I can't sit on
> >> the sofa?
> >
> > There's a certain "geography" of a place that defines what is likely or
> > possible to occur within it.  When you walk into Noisebridge, the
> > chances are high that you'll walk into a room of people watching TV on
> > the projector, playing video games, sleeping on the couches, or
> > comparing fart noise apps on their iphones.  With a few exceptions,
> > people don't go to Noisbridge because they've got a great idea, they go
> > to Noisebridge because they're bored.  And this defines the geography.
> >
> > The world around noisebridge has its own geography: sidewalks are for
> > walking, stores are for buying things, the BART is for commuting to
> > work.  The geography of the sidewalk makes it difficult for me to ride a
> > bike on it, and the geography of a store makes it difficult for me
> > compose a symphony in it.  Both are totally possible, but there's
> > something about the way they're set up that provides a cultural
> > resistance to those activities.  And so in many ways the possibilities
> > of our lives are defined, and the only way to change that is to change
> > the geography.
>
> I pretty much agree with all of this and it's really beautiful prose -
> something I've come to expect from you. I'm glad you're engaging in this
> discussion Moxie.
> >
> > When I see people doing things at Noisebridge that I consider inspiring,
> > they always appear to be sort of sneaking past the culture of what's
> > going on around them.  I'm not talking about a place that's buzzing with
> > happening projects along with a single person taking a nap in the
> > corner, but the inverse.  Ideally I think you'd want the geography of a
> > hackerspace to encourage inspiring projects, not set up a culture that
> > offers resistance to them.  If that's not the case, what's the
> > difference between Noisbridge and any other place?
> >
>
> I think that is an incredibly depressing assessment but it is also
> rather short on details. Could you give an example of some things that
> we as a community could do - both to reshape the geography and that
> would inspire you? What is it that you see only in passing, only when it
> sneaks around?
>
> >> I'd love to hear about other issues because some of them are really
> >> probably something that does impact us all. It would be good to fix
> >> pressing issues that push you away because you're part of the reason
> >> that Noisebridge is such a fucking anarchist mess. You personally. :-)
> >
> > I think Noisebridge is a really interesting experiment in public space,
>
> We'll, I'm glad for that. Sort of.
>
> > but I'm sorry if I ever somehow gave you the impression that anarchy is
> > "no rules."  Anarchy is "no rulers," which is very different.
>
> Oh, there's nothing to be sorry about. I think that we set some very
> basic agreements at the start and they are intentionally difficult to
> change. Part of this is to ensure that the space has and continues to
> have no rulers; at any point, we can reach consensus on various issues
> that need to be reached.
>
> For really major issues - like finding a new space, we've done it and
> people were heard - all of their concerns, even the most trivial. For
> other minor issues that are not contentious, we've done it as well. For
> issues that are are really contentions and force people that do not want
> to be forced?
>
> In any case, I'm now talking about methods - like consensus versus
> ranked choice voting. In some ways, I think it's irrelevant and in other
> ways, I think the methods we employ are actually important to the goals
> we hope to achieve.
>
> We wanted to avoid sybil related issues at various points in time and we
> also wanted to ensure that some values (anti-racist, anti-homophobic,
> pro-free software, pro-free hardware, pro-co-hacking) were kept
> together. We've largely put all of that together under the banner of
> "being excellent" to each other.
>
> > Anarchists actually *love* rules.  The "circle a" was Proudhon's
> > shorthand for "anarchy is order," and even the very first anarchist
> > writings were all about ideas for... rules!
> >
>
> Ha, sure. Some anarchists love orderly rules and some love order without
> written rules. I'd say the CrimeThink people in Days of War, Nights of
> Love are hardly advocating the love of rules...
>
> Though I agree with your assessment of Ⓐ; I hardly think Noisebridge is
> somehow not an anarchist space because it does not fit perfectly with
> every aspect of how Proudhon might have done it.
>
> > I mean really, if Noisebridge is an "anarchist space" because it imposes
> > no rules in addition to the state framework it is surrounded by, does
> > that mean that Dolores park is an anarchist space too?
> >
>
> Your framing seems a bit off - you imply that the only way to shape a
> space is with rules; why is that?
>
> I'll try again:
>
> Would you tell me about your dreams for the place?  What could our
> experiment be in your vision? What could Noisebrige as a community
> create as a unifying project? Or a set of unifying meta-projects?
>
> All the best,
> Jake
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>



-- 
Shannon Lee
(503) 539-3700

"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20101224/fdd37b97/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list