[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Executive Director
Tomm
tomm.fire at gmail.com
Sun Feb 28 07:32:10 UTC 2010
On 2/27/2010 1:05 PM, Zedd Epstein wrote:
> There was only one person that blocked. She is not willing to change
> her position for the good of the organization as a whole, and our
> version of consensus doesn't allow us to just run her over. Therefore
> the only recourse we have is to find someone else that we can all
> agree on.
I don't think that requiring unanimous consent is a good thing for
Noisebridge. Not that I know what Noisebridge is, really, or even know
the people involved, but I do know that if there are more than a handful
of people, unanimous consent doesn't have a good track record in
functional organizations.
"Many historians hold that a major cause of the Commonwealth's downfall
was the principle of /liberum veto"/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberum_veto
But no need to look that far back for examples: just look at Jim
Bunning's recent "accomplishment" in the US Senate. For more problems,
look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making#Criticisms
I support the tyranny of the majority for most decisions, and 2/3 vote
for important decisions (like ED votes). It works, and I believe it's
what almost all organizations use [citation needed].
Tom
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Vlad Spears <spears at 2secondfuse.com
> <mailto:spears at 2secondfuse.com>> wrote:
>
> Was acceptance of attendance by remote means brought up in the
> meeting? If so, it seems that should have ended the objection to
> Mitch as Executive Director. At that point, why was the block
> retained by whoever blocked?
>
> It would be great if someone who actually blocked Mitch could speak up
> on this list.
>
> Vlad
>
>
> On Feb 27, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Jeffrey Malone wrote:
>
> >> From my recollection, there have been only two board meetings
> in the
> > past 12 months. Maybe three.
> > One week's notice is required to hold one, and I believe that is the
> > standard advanced warning.
> >
> > Attendance is perfectly acceptable via phone, or other electronic
> > means (as explicitly stated in our bylaws).
> >
> > Jeffrey
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:40 AM, dmolnar <dmolnar at gmail.com
> <mailto:dmolnar at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> How many BOD meetings do we have?
> >> Are they frequent enough that it would be difficult to schedule
> >> attending in
> >> advance?
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Ever Falling <everfalling at gmail.com
> <mailto:everfalling at gmail.com>>
> >> Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 11:33 AM
> >> To: Vlad Spears <spears at 2secondfuse.com
> <mailto:spears at 2secondfuse.com>>
> >> Cc: Noisebridge Discussion List
> <noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> <mailto:noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
> >> >
> >> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Executive Director
> >>
> >> IIRC there was only one point made for why Mitch wouldn't be the /
> >> best/
> >> choice (not that he wouldn't, for this one point, otherwise be a
> >> good ED)
> >> for ED and that's the fact that he travels a lot and wouldn't be
> >> able to
> >> attend the required BOD meetings all the time. Christie, who made
> >> the point,
> >> suggested Micholi (sp?) as he's at the space more often.
> >>
> >> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Vlad Spears
> >> <spears at 2secondfuse.com <mailto:spears at 2secondfuse.com>>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 27, 2010, at 9:10 AM, Ani Niow wrote:
> >>>
> >>> According to our bylaws
> >>> (https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Bylaws#ARTICLE_V_OFFICERS), the
> >>> ED's only
> >>> responsibilities to preside over all board meetings and submit a
> >>> financial
> >>> report 120 days after the end of the fiscal year. Occasionally as
> >>> an officer
> >>> the ED may be asked to help or sign paperwork such as getting a
> >>> seller's
> >>> permit (which we've been trying to get for months but given the
> >>> unclear
> >>> status of if we have actually *had* an ED since October it has not
> >>> happened
> >>> yet). Other than that it's generally being an otherwise awesome
> >>> contributor
> >>> to Noisebridge.
> >>> What the arguing is about is that some people feel that the ED
> >>> should have
> >>> more responsibility, such as being an advocate for Noisebridge in
> >>> their
> >>> travels and being a representative of sorts. I disagree with this
> >>> view given
> >>> we are a collective without anyone being in a hierarchy, we should
> >>> all be
> >>> doing this job as members and contributors.
> >>>
> >>> So is this why Mitch was blocked as Executive Director? These are
> >>> two
> >>> different issues.
> >>> Issue 1) We need an Executive Director now.
> >>> Issue 2) Later, after much discussion, let's affirm or redefine
> >>> exactly
> >>> what the Executive Director's role is. If the person currently in
> >>> the role
> >>> at a point of redefinition cannot fulfill it, they can step down
> >>> and a new
> >>> Executive Director can be sought.
> >>> I'd like to point out while we are all advocates and
> >>> representatives of
> >>> Noisebridge in the wider world, it would be poor planning not to
> >>> account for
> >>> the fact our internal valuations do not match the wider world's
> >>> perceptions.
> >>> Noisebridge members generally know that "Executive Director" does
> >>> not mean
> >>> "in charge" and is not a position of power. The outside world
> >>> does not know
> >>> this, and assumes the inverse. It seems particularly important,
> >>> then, to
> >>> have an Executive Director who is not just generally awesome as a
> >>> Noisebridge contributor, but can explain this to the outside world
> >>> while not
> >>> being prone to self-aggrandizement or assumption of power they do
> >>> not
> >>> actually wield. This fits Mitch like a glove.
> >>> Again, who blocked Mitch and why?
> >>> Vlad
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> >>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
> >>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Trying to fix or change something, only guarantees and perpetuates
> >> its
> >> existence.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> >> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >>
> >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100227/ef310608/attachment-0003.html>
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss
mailing list