[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Executive Director

[Vlad Spears]

On Mar 1, 2010, at 8:21 AM, Shannon Lee wrote:

> I also think that "changing the way it's done" in the middle of  
> doing it is a mistake.  My preference would have been to get our  
> final outstanding officer slot filled and *then* have a series of  
> meetings where we come up with an official process, but maybe  
> Christie is right and we should do that first.  We certainly  
> shouldn't do them concurrently.

Exactly.  So let me adjust the original 2 step process I entered this  
conversation with and add an additional step:

Issue 1) We need an Executive Director now, and we have existing rules  
to get it done.
Issue 2) Later, after much discussion, let's affirm or redefine the  
process by which an Officer of Noisebridge is appointed.
Issue 3) Later, after much more 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.

The problem here is *not* that the consensus process is broken so much  
as that we are not adhering to it.  Part of consensus is about  
compromise.  Christie laid out some objections to Mitch.  Though her  
public objections have now been considered and answered by membership,  
she refuses to release her block.  There is a discussion to be had  
about this, but it can wait until after we find a new Executive  
Director.

Another aspect of consensus is to slow down the process and  
communicate.  Though we need an Executive Director now, I'm fine with  
however long this process takes.  Rather than "tally a vote" we  
communicate and consider, exactly as we are doing, and "reach  
consensus".  Voting enables us to choose the most popular.   
Communicating and consensing allows us to find the right person, even  
if it takes longer.

If this is taking a long time now, it will take even longer if we try  
to switch from consensus to voting as the process for selecting an  
Officer.  Until someone can convince me voting is somehow better for  
us in any given circumstance than consensus, I will block any move to  
switch in order to slow down the process.  It's likely others will  
also block.  So this conversation on selection method only serves to  
distract from the task at hand: consensing on the appointment of  
someone to the position of Executive Director, which is actually not a  
very important or even demanding role.

Vlad