[Noisebridge-discuss] missing IBM model M keyboard from my shelf
Casey Callendrello
c1 at caseyc.net
Tue Sep 20 23:23:18 UTC 2011
This sounds pretty good, but it does exclude
potentially-highly-excellent foreign visitors who don't have a working
US phone number. I think we want there to be *some* sort of doorbell.
My personal opinion is that the doorbell (the thing that makes makes the
annoying nose) should only function from 9a-10p. I think the door button
shouldn't work at all.
On 9/20/2011 16:00, Gian Pablo Villamil wrote:
> Why not just disable the doorbell entirely?
>
> If someone wants to get in, they either a) have a key b) the phone
> number of someone in the space who they know or c) the number of the
> Cisco IP phone. The latter can be easily found by going online, and
> forces interaction with someone (the person who answers the phone).
>
> Someone with a track record of proven excellence can be given a key -
> even if they are not a member.
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Casey Callendrello <c1 at caseyc.net
> <mailto:c1 at caseyc.net>> wrote:
>
> A few thoughts. I'm just brainstorming here, and welcome comment.
>
> First of all, I highly discourage use of the doorbell as a regular
> means of access. I have personally made it very easy to open the
> gate via cellphone, and I have a more-secure and even-simpler
> method in the works. I have put my do-ocratic capital where my
> mouth is, as it were.
>
> What if we disable the doorbell entirely during certain hours?
>
> What if we disable the door button? During certain hours? To let a
> guest in, you have to walk down to the street, greet them, and
> open the door.
>
> --Casey
>
>
>
>
> On 09/20/2011 11:49 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote:
>> I agree with rubin. This makes a lot of sense and would
>> completely solve this problem and prevent others. On nights like
>> 5 minutes of fame, we could just leave the doors open, if
>> neccessary. For other nights and times of the day we could just
>> let people in. I am a bit worried about doors near the elevator
>> since we would need to make sure the 2nd floor people can still
>> get to it and ensuring handicapped access.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Rameen <emprameen at gmail.com
>> <mailto:emprameen at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I agree with Rubin, and a lot of other people.
>>
>> Moreover, I'm extremely impressed by everyone who is
>> presenting ideas and contributing.
>> I think it's important to point out, this is a do-ocracy and
>> whatever physical alterations occur in the space, are
>> generally approved by the people who are regularly at the
>> space and actually do stuff. If not, those people tend to
>> un-do those things, because sometimes the public understands
>> what's good for itself. No one owns the space, but we all
>> make it to benefit each other, as well as ourselves.
>>
>> This entire thread is pretty astonishing to me. You guys are
>> amazing!
>>
>> I love Noisebridge a lot, and would be sad if it wasn't as
>> easy for others to access the space as I have been able to. I
>> probably wouldn't have been around to help found the
>> delicious Tastebridge, otherwise!
>>
>> I think we should implement some of the easier solutions,
>> like Rubin's simple (yet powerful) social approach. A change
>> in mentality, as someone sort-of pointed out, could be
>> something to consider-- don't leave your valuable things
>> lying around in a public space for anyone to pick up. It's
>> less likely someone is going to try to wheel your robot out
>> of NB than a phone or slender laptop, and it does happen, but
>> be CAREFUL. Everyone wants the space to be safe and open, but
>> some extreme instances of personal material loss shouldn't be
>> cause to change Noisebridge's radical acceptance policy. Even
>> Jake, who started this thread, has good solutions that won't
>> necessarily compromise a lot of the openness and public
>> excellence that DOES exist!
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Rubin Abdi
>> <rubin at starset.net <mailto:rubin at starset.net>> wrote:
>>
>> $0.02
>>
>> At the old space, 83c, we had a front door. This door was
>> always locked
>> on the outside. If someone rang the doorbell it was up to
>> someone inside
>> to get up and let them in. In doing so they would meet
>> the person. It
>> was great, until people didn't want to get up every 5
>> minutes to let
>> people in. Some of us started handing out keys to those
>> who seemed smart
>> and would come by often. Some of us gave out keys to
>> people we would
>> meet traveling and seemed smart. This system worked well,
>> until we moved.
>>
>> In another life I worked at a video game store. Anyone
>> who's done retail
>> knows the rule about greeting people. You try to say hi
>> to every single
>> person who comes in through the front door before they
>> can have a chance
>> to look at any merchandise or get to the front counter,
>> create dialog
>> with them. All this not to help them with finding
>> whatever crap it was
>> that they want, but to make them understand that people
>> working in the
>> shop know they're present. It's the first step in loss
>> prevention, if
>> you know someone's already spotted you coming through the
>> front door,
>> the chances of you stealing something drastically goes
>> down. Think about
>> it the next couple of times you walk into a retail store,
>> even the big
>> ones will tend to have someone right at the door to say
>> hi to you.
>>
>> We're now at a new space. None of our doors really have
>> locks. We've got
>> this crazy system that buzzes people in without ever
>> really having
>> someone greet them, might as well just leave the gate
>> open 24/7. We are
>> a public space. You walk in, make no social connection to
>> anyone there,
>> the things in the space have no ties to anyone you've
>> met, they're up
>> for the picking, you take what you want, you leave.
>>
>> Those of us here who've stolen goods (in a past life)
>> know this, this is
>> how we think. It's harder to steal from an individual
>> than it is to
>> steal from a faceless entity.
>>
>> In my opinion, lockers acknowledge that some people feel
>> there's a theft
>> problem at Noisebridge, and they have to keep their own
>> personal crown
>> jewels in a safe, much in the same way the good liquor
>> and cigarets are
>> locked inside a glass case. They know theft is going to
>> happen, they
>> just don't want it to happen to those things. Stuff will
>> still get stolen.
>>
>> I feel the right solution to this is to make thieves
>> understand what the
>> space is, what people are doing in the space, and that if
>> they are here
>> for theft, they are stealing from good people, people
>> active in the
>> space. That they're aren't simply walking into a nameless
>> department
>> store, they're walking into a community space filled with
>> people similar
>> to them.
>>
>> My suggestion for a long while has been to get rid of the
>> automatic buzz
>> in system, and to put in place locks to the door at the
>> top of the
>> stairs and to door off the elevator room. Part of being
>> in the space is
>> helping it out right? If people want to come in you have
>> to let them in.
>> If you don't feel like letting people in, don't. The
>> notion of gifting a
>> key to someone becomes more worth while again (the act is
>> very much a
>> symbol outside of The Bay Area to people who still
>> haven't been to the
>> space it's like gold, but since we buzz in everyone,
>> locals don't give a
>> shit), because you trust that person enough to give
>> him/her a copy. When
>> you hold a key, you understand who hold access to a place
>> that's
>> accepted you to share it.
>>
>> In my experience, fixing social problems tend to last
>> longer and work
>> stronger than creating physical workaround (which are
>> easier to break
>> and hack, like lockers).
>>
>> But then again I've been preaching this fucking idea for
>> so long with no
>> one really biting due to laziness to not really want to
>> getup and answer
>> the door and a lack of social backbone to greet new
>> people coming into a
>> space you share with your community, at this point I
>> suppose that I must
>> be the one with the wrong ideas and concepts here and
>> that I really
>> don't have any comprehension on how the mind of thief
>> works...
>>
>> --
>> Rubin
>> rubin at starset.net <mailto:rubin at starset.net>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ronald Cotoni
>> Systems Engineer
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> <mailto: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/20110920/4015e7e2/attachment-0003.html>
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss
mailing list