[Noisebridge-discuss] meeting notes 9-7

Wed Sep 8 23:44:20 UTC 2010

The issue of whether to have consensus or not has come up over and over and
over and over again. I'm copy/pasting my argument from aabout a year ago.
Please read the entire discussion we had on this for context:
https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2009-October/008616.html

<https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2009-October/008616.html>TL;DR:
we use consensus so people rely on themselves rather than a political system
to do things.
<https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2009-October/008616.html>

Anyone who is entering a new social system is expressing an interest to be a
part of it. There is always an initial period of "normalizing" where people
make mistakes as they acclimate to the new environment and learn how the new
social group differs from their old one. I speak as someone who has made
such mistakes and learned from them.

If you are new to a group and don't understand why people react the way they
do to your actions, the proper response is to ask questions. This helps you
to better understand *why* the status quo is such, and better define your
own reasoning and actions within the group. It also shows active interest in
becoming a more critical part of the group, and builds up trust with which
you can later help new people achieve similar understanding.

Consensus is actually very important in encourage a do-ocrary. The harder it
is to come to a group decision, the fewer the items that will be brought up
for such a decision. This reduces overall clutter for the group and
encourages people to decide actions for themselves, rather than relying on
the acknowledgments of others. For the decisions which *do* require the
consent of all members, this ensures that every concern will be addressed.

Before complaining, ask yourself the following questions:

   - What items have come up for consensus (not discussion)?
   - When has a block ever been used?
   - How often do people "threaten" to block? (Compare this to how many
   people say they're going to do a project and don't)
   - If you have better ideas on how things could be run, have you seriously
   approached a board member with them?
   - How much effort have you made to understand why the current status quo
   is? (I recommend reading through all the previous meeting notes on the wiki,
   including those from before 83C existed where the different processes were
   discussed)

Fear and social capital are present in any social group. We are not created
equal, and this is why we need to work together. Some people are better at X
than others, but they suck at Y, so they need to work with people who are
great at Y but suck at X. Some people are great leaders, some are excellent
followers.

If people could do everything on their own, social groups would not exist.
And yet, we are so passionate about our places in them that we thereby prove
we need them.

aestetix

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 9:52 PM, Rachel McConnell <rachel at xtreme.com> wrote:

> Introductions
>
>
> Ideas for hacking the foosball table (pour epoxy in it)
>
>
> Shannon explains the consensus process.  there is some disagreement
> about it.
>
>
> Andy brings up a discussion item: Club Mate.  He has some.  He has 7
> cases.  He invites you to buy it from him because he can't afford to
> donate it.  They cost him $60 per case (20 bottles per case) but he is
> not sure how much he's selling it for.  He would like Noisebridge to see
> $4 per bottle.  He is soliciting ideas about how to handle this.  Last
> time we had Club Mate, we lost money on it b/c people didn't realize how
> much it cost.  Thoughts:
>
> * he could sell it by the case
> * he could hire a dealer to sell bottles for $5: $1 for the dealer, $1
> for Noisebridge, $3 for Andy to recover his costs
> * allow people to sponsor cases and donate them to NB
> * get people to sell them at 5MoF
> * pee in the corner (OK this isn't Club Mate specific, we ratholed a
> little)
> * Arse Electronica!  Parties!  We have two bathrooms now!
>
>
> Other Rachel wants to move the first aid cabinet somewhere more obvious.
>  She plans to put it near the front door so people can see it and will
> hopefully remember where it was.  Also accepting donations for refilling
> it, and input if anyone else cares.
>
>
> September 25th Reading Party for Scott's going away party.
>
>
> Next wed the 15th at 6PM Brewing Course, see Franticek.
>
>
> Next Thursday from 7-9, Willow from Jigsaw Renaissance is coming to talk
> about a new organization Geeks without Borders (a different one from the
> old one apparently).  She's soliciting feedback and ideas and help for it.
>
>
> Shannon announces a symposium on consensus and invites everyone with an
> opinion on it to attend.  It is unscheduled as yet, please contact him
> if you are interested.  Sometime in October or November.
>
>
> Rubin announces that Jof has lost his legs and is being pushed around in
> the wheelchair.  The first part of this is false.
>
>
> Treasurer position is coming open soon.  Next week we should discuss it
> and the week after come to a consensus on the new treasurer.  Shannon
> will manage the process of deciding on the new treasurer.  Kelly is a
> candidate for the thankless and difficult task.
>
> Treasurer's report: Kelly notes that it's gonna be a ton of work to
> figure out who has paid their dues over time and solicits assistance
> with that task.  We have about $12k overall.  $7100 checking $4100
> savings $700 paypal or maybe more b/c a lot of it is unreconciled, we're
> not really sure.  Sept rent has been paid.  Once Kelly has the data
> reconciled, she will contact members who haven't paid for a while and
> remind them.  Also, we should email the announce list every month to
> remind people to pay their dues.  Maybe someone will do this.
>
> Secretary position is also coming open.  If you think there should be
> more (or fewer) meeting notes, Secretary may be the position for you.
>
>
> Crutcher proposes a consensus item, that we change the consensus process
> to a 90% majority vote (of quorum).  He will put it on the agenda for
> next week.  Please come and discuss it.  Some current discussion has
> included:
>
> * "voting systems where you can just straight up lose are better in how
> people treat each other"
> * consensus is a brake on bad decisions
> * consensus gives the decisions to those with the most social capital
> * how is this different from any decision making process
> * consensus is "monkeys flinging poo"
> * technology can solve social problems, as politics, economics, etc are
> technologies
>
> Names from the binder.  This was kinda rushed and most people had left,
> you should go look at the binder.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100908/fd79eeb5/attachment-0003.html>