[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Executive Director

Zedd Epstein zedd.00 at gmail.com
Sun Feb 28 20:41:01 UTC 2010


Christy,

Will you please list what your problems with Mitch are. You repeatedly say
that we haven't addressed your problems, but you haven't actually said what
those problems are.

"Blocks are generally considered to be an extreme measure, only used when a
member feels a proposal "endanger[s] the organization or its participants,
or violate[s] the mission of the organization" (i.e., a principled
objection). In some consensus models, a group member opposing a proposal
must work with its proponents to find a solution that will work for
everyone.:"  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making)

I would really like to know how Mitch as ED would endanger the organization
or its participants, or violate the mission of the organization.

Thanks,
Zedd

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Ani Niow <v at oneletterwonder.com> wrote:

> I would like to formally re-nominate Mitch for the position of the
> Executive Director of Noisebridge.
>
>
>
> -Ani
>
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Jeffrey Malone <ieatlint at tehinterweb.com>wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Sai Emrys <noisebridge at saizai.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Andy Isaacson <adi at hexapodia.org>
>> wrote:
>> >> We currently have all of these things.  AFAIK, until the board appoints
>> >> a new ED, Jake continues in his appointment from last year.
>> >
>> > That's my reading as well. Officers serve until replaced; Board
>> > members have terms of office.
>> >
>>
>> Actually, you have that kind of backwards.
>> Both have terms -- 1 year.  Board members remain in office until they
>> are replaced.
>> There is no such clause for officers.  Our bylaws state that they must
>> be appointed annually, and as the year ran up at the beginning of
>> October, so did the term for all three officer positions.
>>
>> Noisebridge has been without an ED since October.  This has been
>> stated at a board meeting and a general meeting.
>> In fact, two board members even tried to simply appoint an ED at the
>> last board meeting to "fix" this.  They even planned to do so without
>> consulting the members before conceding to objections that while the
>> legal authority exists for them to do that, it runs completely against
>> Noisebridge policy.
>>
>>
>>
>> In general, I would like to thank all of you for turning this into a
>> discussion about what people feel the ED is, and absolutely nothing to
>> do with actually selecting a new one.
>> You might argue that you feel defining the role is the same thing.
>> It's not -- who it is, and what they will be doing are two different
>> controversial subjects.  Intertwining them has, as best I can tell,
>> resulted in absolutely no progress on either side.
>>
>> So any chance this can get back on topic to its original intent of
>> nominating people for the ED?  Or should I simply give up?
>>
>> Jeffrey
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> 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/20100228/a79410ae/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list