[Noisebridge-discuss] Frantisek is going to stop living at Noisebridge starting tonight.

jim jim at well.com
Tue Nov 16 20:36:05 UTC 2010


   i do not think frantisek is living at NB. i think 
he's living in the sf bay area at large, that's quite 
different. 
   i think everyone has made good points; interesting 
to ponder the contradictions. 
   i hope we'll discontinue this thread and continue 
the discussion in person and possibly other media. 





On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 12:08 -0800, Albert Sweigart wrote:
> I’ll be repeating a lot of what I said in my original email, but
> here’s my reply.
> 
> > I gotta say - what a bummer to name Frantisek specifically on an open, public, archived mailing list.
> 
> I said this in my original email, but: I know, but this is not
> something that I can fix personally and so I reached out to the
> general NB community. I considered the transparency vs. privacy and
> made a decision. We can just delete it from the archives if it is a
> big deal. (I don’t really think that’s Orwellian.)
> 
> > I agree with some of the things you've stated - though I personally do not care if Frantisek sleeps at Noisebridge irregularly.
> 
> I said this in my original email, but: This isn’t about Frantisek
> sleeping at NB, it’s about him living there.
> 
> > If someone generally misses BART…
> 
> This isn’t relevant. People miss BART by accident and on occasion. My
> email was about a person living at NB.
> 
> > I understand the principles at play and I can't fucking live with myself if I'm pushing him into the winter rain.
> 
> Hep brought up a number of alternatives and he has plenty of friends.
> “Pushing him into the winter rain” is a stretch.
> 
> > I'd probably resign my fiscal sponsorship if anyone seriously made it
> "their cause" at Noisebridge to toss out Frantisek
> 
> I said this in my original email, but: This isn’t about kicking out
> Frantisek from Noisebridge, this is about not allowing him to live at
> Noisebridge. I have overwhelming heard from the membership that we
> don’t want people turning Noisebridge into their residence, and I
> would like to see this applied equally and fairly.
> 
> > … make a new hacker space in Mexico - I guess that means his intentions are quite
> clearly to spread Noisebridge south. So how much do we want to press
> this issue? How important is it to you?
> 
> It’s important to most of the membership. It’s just important enough
> for me that I write an email about it to start discussion. We
> shouldn’t ignore this though. Until plans for Noisebridge Mexico are
> concrete, Frantisek would still be living at Noisebridge for “just a
> few more days”.
> 
> > But I think that not being upset about someone missing BART and then being upset about sleeping on a sofa for other reasons is pretty lame.
> 
> This isn’t relevant. People miss BART by accident and on occasion. My
> email was about a person living at NB.
> 
> > In any case: Who outed a person by name on a mailing list and in effect created a possibly heavy handed punitive measure that is long lasting?
> 
> Frantisek has admit to me that he knows how NB feels about people
> living in the space. And I said in my email that I don't want
> Frantisek kicked out. I don't think "you can't live at Noisebridge" is
> a "heavy handed punitive measure".
> 
> > I agree that we made an agreement. I also understand that we make exceptions to the agreement.
> 
> This is on a different topic, but I think the vagueness of these
> "exceptions" is at the top of the list of Things That Noisebridge
> Needs To Fix. The lack of rules does allow us flexibility, but at the
> same time if I see an abuse of the space, I'm not sure what accepted
> recourse I have. Is politely but firmly pointing out the problem in no
> uncertain terms crossing the line?
> 
> -Al
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> 




More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list