[Noisebridge-discuss] ROBERT 2.0 should not be banned despite some problems he creates

Mon May 28 16:59:03 UTC 2012

Moral of the story, don't think that dropping POTENTIALLY useful servers at
noisebridge buys you anything, because, chances are, they'll just be gutted
for hard drives and put on the street.

If you think they have value, sell them to someone who sees it, then buy a
pizza with all of your spoils...

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 7:49 AM, jim <jim at systemateka.com> wrote:

>
>
> Excellent report!
>
>
> On Sun, 2012-05-27 at 12:46 -0700, Rubin Abdi wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > The rack in question had no names or contact info written on it. It
> > was blocking access to the fire escape at the time. It had a rats nest
> > of wires and cables, some going over head and past the the project
> > shelves. From what I remember it didn't even have proper power,
> > nothing was powered on.
> >
> > None of the machines on the rack, at the time that Ben and I decided
> > that the thing was waste and shouldn't be blocking access and taking
> > up space, didn't even have hard drives. They were mostly really really
> > really old networking equipment. Nothing on it was properly screwed in.
> >
> > The rack and its contents gave no impression that it was anyone's
> > personal belongings, or anyone's personal project. If it was meant to
> > be a project interfacing with the rest of the Noisebridge network (for
> > Noisebridge), for the amount of time it existed in the space,
> > rack at lists never once saw an email about it nor its goals it was
> > trying to fulfill over our current setup.
> >
> > If the rack was being used for "clustering" and "teach a class", I
> > would love to know who heard that directly from Rob 2.0.
> >
> > If the rack was someone's personal belongings, I'm deeply sorry that
> > Ben and I threw it out without informing you that some work needed to
> > be done before it should belong in the space (discussion about power
> > use, network use, clearly labeling who the item belongs do, the
> > project its a part of, contact information, not making it be a safety
> > hazard). All in all I find it rather rude to point fingers and cry
> > "unjustice" when common sense is blatantly ignored in respects to
> > personal belongings and respect in a community shared space.
> >
> > Other than this whole rack debacle, I have no issues against Rob 2.0's
> > incompetence regarding software on public machines at Noisebridge. The
> > issues I do take with were his utter lack of respect to those who
> > setup those machines (one in particular for micro controller programing).
> >
> > Additionally we've had a "no one fucking sleeps at Noisebridge" policy
> > since before we moved into 2169, stating otherwise is a lie. I've
> > informed Rob 2.0 of this on three different occasions (once with
> > Andy), waking him up, and letting him know that sleeping in the space
> > isn't a thing to do, and that if he needs a nap he should head home.
> > Each one of those times he's been extremely rude to me and has raised
> > his voice. The last one of those instances both Andy and I asked him
> > to leave the space and come back when he is more rested and less
> > aggressive. Since then he's crashed in the space time and time again.
> >
> > The community has burnt countless man hours (days at this point)
> > discussing Rob 2.0, how to interact with him, providing mediation,
> > debating on if banning him is appropriate or not. Over this time Rob
> > 2.0 has not once stepped up to talk to those of us who take issue with
> > him (a large number of us now), we don't even have a reliable channel
> > of communication to get a hold of him. He's lied to others about
> > talking with Mitch regarding mediation (and that Mitch said it was
> > cool for him to enter the space, when Rob 2.0 hadn't even spoken to
> > Mitch ever). We've given him a wide range of opportunities and means
> > to work with us, the Noisebridge community, to make things work for
> > both groups, and he's basically spat back in the face of that.
> >
> > Us as a community have tried quite hard to make things work with Rob
> > 2.0, and it's blatantly obvious this is something he doesn't want. If
> > you want to give him an inch and hear him out and work with him, then
> > please by all means do so, but on your own time, not that of
> > Noisebridge's. We've obviously failed at being a functional space for
> > Rob 2.0, our values and general community behaviors don't line up with
> > his.
> >
> > Robert Chu, could you please only speak about Rob 2.0 if he actually
> > contacts you and asks for a proxy? I'm starting to really hate these
> > eternal threads of (s)he said this, totally unfair, bring on justice,
> > when the party in question has no desire to defend themselves. He's
> > got plenty of time to fail at stalking me in my own neighborhood, no
> > reason why he can't put any of that time into actually talking with
> > Noisebridge about these issues.
> >
> > There are two parts to our excellent code at Noisebridge for me,
> > generally being awesome, and playing nice with others. The second one
> > there isn't optional.
> >
> > - --
> > Rubin
> > rubin at starset.net
> >
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
> >
> > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPwoR8AAoJENiO8GEa75D0EH8IAJIeyqliw9kxJS2LYAxE0GZ7
> > 5KdNG3ZI2w73I2hPv5G2cv6IdGA+WkTTUYxtTLe/i7/waGtp2TpQ7oRb5PSudZO7
> > ltIFz/YQY1ZhW0bKfHWQ7JBIXuIGoB9rB9lubYeHl2sU0nt4CyRoCUqrCrNJuClN
> > /QuuePIdBScn9V+vrggIGs7l4VWKV6BdiRf9C+raC4pdiTfeVF8OP/ZvZ02Bhhcg
> > 8rZRQWQBnoQO17k+njHl+nvPTHdiZXauiFxuIcTSiun+MM/kGkoLRr4IczYrGCXE
> > 5zefd8OyFmwfOMjkBnAIAIWevaXZrbT5odSFW32J8EoVzlcZmtTzWuU9RuLo5KM=
> > =FiNV
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>

-- 
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler - Albert
Einstein <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein>
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo Da
Vinci<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_Da_Vinci>
Perfection is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there
is nothing left to take away - Antoine de Saint
Exupéry<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_de_Saint_Exup%C3%A9ry>
Keep It Simple Stupid - Kelly
Johnson<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Johnson>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20120528/f337aa88/attachment-0001.html>