[Noisebridge-discuss] Banning Patrick from Noisebridge
rubin at starset.net
Thu Feb 24 08:27:49 UTC 2011
Adrian Bankhead wrote, On 20110223 230416:
> Are you just "fairly certain" or can you (or anyone) provide absolute
> assurance that Patrick will have the ability to respond formally to the charges
> that have been made against him before he is banned? Or is that not how things
> work around here? Has Patrick been informed of his right to defend himself,
> and has he been formally invited to answer these *very* serious allegations?
> Because until I raised the question, I had not seen any discussion at all of
> Patrick's rights with regards to being banned. I had assumed that he had been
> banned from your first "ban" email, and that his ban would simply be ratified
> after-the-fact in group discussion. ("Trust us") Apparently I went through like
> a hundred emails and I've mistaken (and horrified) the whole time. If I am,
> then Patrick might be as well.
Doing this Key Bullet Point Style...
* First off please read the whole thread before poking and prodding.
Patrick totally sent an email to the list, no one has yet imposed any
sort of blockage on the young sir.
* No one has removed any rights from Patrick.
* The only two things we've reached to have been (1) There's a list of
people who'll go up to Patrick if he's in the space, communicate to him
that he's not welcomed and ask him to kindly leave, and (2) we've
started the week long processes of reaching consensus on the subject of
as a nonprofit, officially banning Patrick from Noisebridge due to
issues of personal safety.
* As being one of those people on the list I would be more then
extremely happy to give Patrick a chance to tell me his side of the
story and defend his position *only if he does that in a productive way
and listens/responds to the issues at hand*. I have no more patience for
his ability to sidestep conflict resolution through pointless email
banter and escaping the physical space.
> I'm sorry for pressing the issue - but I'd like to feel like I'm joining a co-op
> rather than a lynch-mob.
I feel you on that, and considering that I've had to ask several
nameless people to please not (a) have the police arrest Patrick, (b)
stab him in the face, (c) use physical force to actually remove him from
2169, all this through attempting to get a group of people who have
issues with him together to really let him know as one big entity how we
feel outside of the public facing mailing list and well documented
heated Tuesday meetings, I think as a leaderless socially awkward
anarchistic unmmature chaotic mob of a hack space, we're actually doing
I haven't punched anyone in the face yet, shit could be a whole lot worse.
> Also, do you really think that seeking clarification about process is "pissing
> all over the email list"? Are you telling me that my only option to trust you?
> Is this how things work at Noisebridge?
Your options are...
* Piss off and die in a fire (seriously this is an option for everyone
around the world, except for those without fire, think about it)
* Ignore all that's happening and continue to make awesome shit
* Go through discussion, we're doing it here, right fucking now
* Actually take Jason Dusek up on reading what evidence is provided by
the angry mob
* Attempt to talk to the person you're attempting to defend here
* Argue that everything is wrong with this process, which you're more
then welcome to, please bring change if you see it fit
I'm sorry but I don't ever remember using the phrase "trust us", but do
keep in mind that it's entirely up to you to participate in the space or
in consensus process, member or non-member.
rubin at starset.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss