[Noisebridge-discuss] tonights meeting, banning Jay

[Danny O'Brien]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Danny O'Brien <danny at spesh.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:
>
>> At last weeks' meeting, there were a number of people who were on-board
>> with permanently 86ing Jay, the person who spilled beer on Kayla's computer
>> and many other non-excellent actions and episodes.
>>
>> I specifically and repeatedly expressed that I was proposing a permanent
>> ban, and a few people stated that they would block on principle, saying that
>> banning someone is a consensus item that requires a week's advance notice
>> for discussion.  After the meeting, I spoke with Jason (i think) who agreed
>> that a permanent ban was appropriate and walked toward the notetaker stating
>> that he would make sure the weeklong process would begin.  I don't see my
>> proposal mentioned anywhere in the meeting notes but I did make the proposal
>> and I think people should consider that proposal tonight.
>>
>> I will not be attending the meeting, because of something else happening.
>> But I wasn't the only one who thought we had had enough of Jay, and aside
>> from folks playing Devil's advocate (to a fault) i think we had consensus
>> last week.  Either way, here are some things to consider:
>>
>
>  Consensus takes two meetings -- one where the proposal is brought up, and
> added to the "proposed consensus item" list (so that people have advance
> warning), and then another to actually have the discussion. No-one proposed
> the consensus item until after the meeting.
>

Okay, I've taken the language from our last banz0ring, which took a long
discussion in itself, and added it to the proposed consensus item to be
discussed next week:

To bar Jay from entering the space and participating in the community.

Note on some points from last time:
This is a revocable statement, since we can always consent to undo it (we
had a long discussion about time-limiting such bans, and settled on this.)
There was a general feeling that the person being banned should have a right
to defend themselves against the ban. Patrick chose not to do this, but I
will propose at today's meeting that we allow Jay to return if he chooses
next week to defend himself for the duration of the next meeting.

We also had a separate group discuss what might be done better than last
time, headed I believe by Rachel H. If they came to any conclusions, now
would be the time to say so.

d.



> Jay is already on a month voluntary suspension, and we have a bunch of
> stuff to go over tonight, so what I'll do is add it as a proposed consensus
> item this week, and then the consensus can happen next week.
>
> I imagine a few people will feel that Jay should be able to respond during
> the final  consensus discussion anyway -- we've offered that before to
> people who were already effectively under a ban. We'll talk about whether
> that is what we want today.
>
> d.
>
>
>
>>
>> Jay said "Last Night Duncan spilled a beer on Kayla's computer, then tried
>> to blame it on me. I was nowhere near him nor was I anywhere near the
>> computer."
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/**pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/**
>> 2011-September/024790.html<https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2011-September/024790.html>
>>
>> Kayla said "Last night at noisebridge a man known as to me as Jay was
>> inebriated and spilled beer on to my $ 3000 15in Macbook Pro."
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/**pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/**
>> 2011-September/024794.html<https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2011-September/024794.html>
>>
>> Duncan said "Last night he was very intoxicated and, as I sat next to
>> Kayla on the couch eating a burrito and enjoying the 1 beer I got with it,
>> he came over to get a laptop off the table and wanted to apologize for an
>> outburst he had at me earlier.  All fine and good until he decided he wanted
>> a hug from me, comes over into me sitting down after I'd verbally thanked
>> but declined, stumbles on a power cord, and drunkenly slurs/knocks into
>> me... knocking the newly opened beer in my hand and splashing it all into
>> the keyboard of Kayla's Macbook Pro laptop.  Seeing it was his intoxication
>> that had caused it, Kayla was furious as her computer was dead by
>> appearance.
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/**pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/**
>> 2011-September/024798.html<https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2011-September/024798.html>
>>
>> Instead of reading Jay's long other emails denying responsibility for
>> everything he's accused of, just look at the simple fact that he lied to
>> everyone about his involvement with this one, very serious incident. There
>> are several more people who witnessed the events that night including Rolf
>> and Alex and there is no doubt about what happened.
>>
>> I think this one statement alone should be enough for us to realize, as a
>> community, that this person can't be trusted in the space or allowed to come
>> to noisebridge ever again.
>>
>> As if that weren't enough, i think it's clear at this point that Jay stole
>> the Carl Zeiss microscope and sold it on Castro street.  You can read about
>> the discussion in the meeting notes:
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/**pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/**
>> 2011-September/024838.html<https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2011-September/024838.html>
>>
>> But the crux of it is this.  A few days before the meeting Duncan had
>> asked someone (RayC?) if a microscope was missing.  RayC asked around and
>> Mike Kan confirmed that the black Carl Zeiss microscope was missing. Duncan
>> told RayC that he had seen Jay selling a microscope along with other items
>> on the street in the Castro.
>>
>> I found out about this on Tuesday, and before the meeting I talked with
>> Mike and Danny about it.  Danny interviewed Duncan before the meeting and
>> Duncan shrank back from certainty about seeing a microscope when he saw Jay
>> selling on Castro, but he gave RayC permission to repeat what he had told
>> him earlier (that he had seen one).
>>
>> During the meeting Jay was asked what he does for money, and he listed
>> activities which included selling his artwork on the sidewalk of the Castro.
>>  This confirmed that he had been selling things from where he was seen by
>> Duncan.  The microscope is definitely gone:
>> http://www.arsmachina.com/**carl_zeiss_binocular.htm<http://www.arsmachina.com/carl_zeiss_binocular.htm>
>>
>> So the only possibilities are:
>> 1. Jay stole the microscope and sold it on Castro, and Duncan saw it.
>> 2. Duncan is a clever mastermind who stole the microscope and framed Jay
>> for it, after spotting him innocently selling Artwork on the Castro and
>> inserting the story about seeing a microscope there.
>> 3. Duncan noticed that the microscope was missing and decided to chance
>> that it wasn't borrowed by someone on the discuss list (as I am doing) and
>> used the opportunity to frame Jay, after spotting him at the Castro and
>> modifying his story only slightly to make it seem true.
>>
>> Option 1 is the simplest, we already have proof that Jay is a liar and not
>> responsible for his own actions or even his own words.
>>
>> Options 2 and 3 are unlikely because while Duncan is known to have "seen"
>> things that others think were only imagined, it would take a very clever and
>> sinister imagination to integrate the missing microscope into an
>> already-acknowledged true story of Jay selling items on Castro.
>>
>> Options 2 and 3 are even more unlikely because if Duncan was actually a
>> clever mastermind bent on framing Jay for the theft of the microscope, he
>> would not have shrank back from being sure of seeing a microscope among Jays
>> items for sale precisely when he was being interviewed by Danny.
>>
>> All this is on top of the fact that Jay lied and said he had nothing to do
>> with the beer being spilled on the computer.  He might as well say that he
>> wasn't even at noisebridge that night, with five people yelling at him to
>> leave for half an hour (or however long it was).
>>
>> When Duncan came to RayC and asked if a microscope was missing, it was
>> because he had seen it at Jays' street sale. Duncan may be a wingnut who
>> says wacky things, but Jay is a thief and has done more than enough damage
>> to our community to be told never to return.
>>
>> -jake
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20110913/69ccf9ec/attachment-0003.html>