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

[Jake]

I don't know why my previous message was truncated but here's the rest:

>From a practical standpoint, the "lease" argument is red herring.  The landlord 
doesn't care, and the "building department" which I have personally dealt with 
several times, would absolutely not care even if they were to somehow teleport 
into the space and find him sleeping in the tea room.  The place is obviously 
not a residence.

I have lived in two warehouses which are the primary residences for a dozen or 
more people, which had to prepare for inspections specifically called to cause 
their eviction, and witnessed the aftermath of two other such inspections.  To 
say that Noisebridge makes the radar is just false.

>From a practical standpoint, Frantisek's presence negatively affects NOBODY 
unless someone really needs to use the tea-room in the middle of the night, 
which is a small inconvenience compared with the valuable service previously 
mentioned.

What I believe is happening here is that one or more people are having a hard 
time internalizing conflicting concepts.  When one knows that the rules say 
that no-one can live at Noisebridge, but simultaniously knows that someone is 
living at noisebridge (what a funny expression), an interrupt is triggered and 
an email is composed and sent to the list.

What is the problem with a contradiction, if everything is working?

By the way, that is a rhetorical question.  The answer to the above Koan is 
no-thing, and the thread ends here.

my disclaimer is that i have not read all the other posts on this topic.