[Noisebridge-discuss] Consensus item for next week - Member- & Guest- Only Hours

Danny O'Brien danny at spesh.com
Wed Jul 13 07:04:31 UTC 2011

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Rubin Abdi <rubin at starset.net> wrote:
> Al Sweigart wrote, On 20110712 233152:
>> I'm putting up an item for consensus next week. Here's the wording,
>> followed by a personal FAQ for questions that I think people might
>> have about it:
>> "From 11pm to 8am are members-only hours at the space. During this
>> time, only members and at most two guests per member accompanied by
>> the member may be at the Noisebridge space."
>> Please email me and the list with any questions/concerns/changes you'd
>> like to see. I've tried to make this a reasonable proposition, but am
>> open to suggestions.
> As a member on hiatus wanting to start paying membership dues again as
> soon as the treasurer can email me back with some confirmation that I am
> able do as such (who watches the watchers?), I block on the simple
> grounds that we have no way of policing anyone around in the space and
> therefor cannot enforce a radical rule as the likes of this. History
> dictates that a rule as such will eventually become corroded, like our
> general rule of no one should sleep at Noisebridge.
> Noisebridge has bigger fundamental problems/features that need to be
> addressed/horrible altered before we can instate such a radical
> rule/divergence from such chaos, such as the fact that we're an open
> community with only one rule, to be excellent to each other.
> General word of mouth with the community before law of the police and
> all that.
> No I'm not British nor drunk.

I am actually British *and* drunk right now, and I'd have to say that
as someone who originally proposed  something  very similar in a brief
fit of FASCIST HITLER-LOVING, I'd oppose this in its current form. Al,
maybe we should talk about this and see if we can get it into a form
that might convince more people. I don't think that there's a huge
chance of something getting through, but it might be productive to
come up with something that might help, even if it doesn't reach the
level of consensus.

Incidentally, Al, I know you had to leave early, but I thought you did
a really good job conveying your point-of-view tonight, and I hope you
got the sense that most people know what you want, and your
frustrations (particularly given how much work you put into stuff).
Also I was surprised by the number of people who are in the place
early and appreciate you coming by -- more people said this after you
had to leave.

Also, contrary to Rubin and Al, I think Noisebridge is doing a lot
right at the moment, and has some awesome stuff going down. When I
said that at the meeting, it got a big round of applause (it also
matches that survey that I also keep citing and NEVER SHOW ANYONE from
earlier in the year). Lots and lots of hackers really love NB, and
part of the reason they love it and continue to love it is because
there's a core of people worrying themselves shitless that it might
fall apart at any point, and keep frantically working to keep it going
in the belief it is turning to shit everytime they stop for a moment.

Here's to the fucking whiny complaining yanks and their sober-ass puritan ways.



> --
> Rubin Abdi
> rubin at starset.net

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list