[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Executive Director

[Ian Atha]

Assume that Mitch is indeed not involved and up-to-date on all things
Noisebridge.

It appears that most people do not have any expectations from the ED
other than what the law requires. In fact, it is fair to assume that
if there was no legal requirement, we wouldn't have an Executive
Director. Therefore, the best ED would duly execute his legal duties,
without any other effect to Noisebridge.

Given Noisebridge's aversion to centralized authority and trust in the
membership to support its goals with ad hoc structures, it seems to me
that Mitch being away a lot is a good forcing function for avoiding
abuse of power, or transforming the executive director's legal powers
to social powers. If one is indeed not involved, one is less likely to
use his title for social clout and/or representing Noisebridge (both
of which I see as incorrect--we all represent Noisebridge as peers).

Or as Zedd just wrote, "The Executive Director rubber-stamps the will
of the membership."


On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:58, Christie Dudley <longobord at gmail.com> wrote:
> My issues with Mitch are fairly minor.  I think he's a great person, but
> he's not terribly involved in the immediate Noisebridge community.  He's
> just not around much and doesn't keep abreast of the breadth of totally
> excellent things going on at Noisebridge, or the ongoing needs of the
> organization.