[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Executive Director

Sun Feb 28 23:39:08 UTC 2010

What about the other candidates?

Who has thoughts on Mikolaj?

Who has thoughts on Lief?

Why aren't we talking about anyone but Mitch?

Christie
_______
"We also briefly discussed having officers replaced by very small shell
scripts." -- Noisebridge meeting notes 2008-06-17

The outer bounds is only the beginning.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genriel/sets/72157623376093724/

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Rachel McConnell <rachel at xtreme.com> wrote:

> Christie, here are some thoughts I had regarding your position on Mitch
> as ED.
>
> I understand why you would object to an 'absentee' ED.  I posit to you
> that there are significant benefits as well.  Noisebridge has an
> extraordinarily rich interaction with other hackerspaces (and generally
> cool people) *worldwide*, due primarily to our roving ambassadors, Jake
> and Mitch.  We've got relationships with hackers not only in Chicago,
> Toronto, Atlanta, etc in North America, but also in Germany and Japan,
> and probably others I'm not yet aware of.
>
> Have you asked Mitch if his schedule will continue to be that he's gone
> a great deal of the time?  It may be that he'll be around more in 2010,
> which would allow him to keep more abreast of the activities of the
> organization.
>
> To address your issue further: regarding keeping abreast of the ongoing
> needs of the organization, we've been pretty clear that this is not
> actually the business of the ED, but of the members.  The ED is *not*
> our leader.  I believe you might respond to this that the ED is
> perceived as such by outsiders, and I would respond to that with, how
> does that cause a problem for us?
>
> Rachel
>
> Christie Dudley 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.
> >
> > In addition to the 'representational' part that Vlad brought up (can he
> > represent us well if he doesn't know us well?) It is the ED's job to
> > call the board meetings, set the agenda and preside.  I think Rachel has
> > been doing a fine job of this so far, but it's not her job.  (Legally,
> > according to the bylaws)  I'd really like to see an ED who can do the
> > job, who understands when board meetings are needed and will make that
> > happen.
> >
> > I think Mitch could do a fair job of muddling through if there were no
> > other candidates.  But there are other candidates who are much more
> > capable of doing a good job with what little is required of them.  It
> > appalls me that we have to have the choice of the board as our only
> > option, especially when it's not the best one.
> >
> > I don't understand why this discussion keeps coming back to Mitch/Not
> > Mitch.  I thought it was the will of the members to decide who.  Why are
> > we not comparing Mitch/Mikolaj/whoever?  This false dichotomy is killing
> > serious consideration of the candidates.
> >
> > We already decided at the meeting this coming week that we would *not*
> > try to form a consensus on the candidates for ED, but rather narrow it
> > down to one to consense on next week.  WHY do we keep coming back to
> > this whole false dichotomy?
> >
> > Christie
> > _______
> > "We also briefly discussed having officers replaced by very small shell
> > scripts." -- Noisebridge meeting notes 2008-06-17
> >
> > The outer bounds is only the beginning.
> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/genriel/sets/72157623376093724/
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Ani Niow <v at oneletterwonder.com
> > <mailto: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 <mailto:ieatlint at tehinterweb.com>> wrote:
> >
> >         On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Sai Emrys
> >         <noisebridge at saizai.com <mailto:noisebridge at saizai.com>> wrote:
> >         > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Andy Isaacson
> >         <adi at hexapodia.org <mailto: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
> >         <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/20100228/c3dff3e9/attachment-0003.html>