[Noisebridge-discuss] Dogs

[Mitchel McAllister]

There are several people here, two of whom were recently "confronted" on their dog being at Noisebridge, who bring their dog with them because they do not have anyone to watch their dog for them, and are not allowed to leave the dog at home unsupervised. Their dog has been quiet, friendly, and has not caused a mess. Yes, the dog is large, but usually just sits under the table. On one occasion, the dog did whine, but that was because she did see me walk into the space and wanted to say hello.

However, the original poster stated the problem as if each and every large dog is a vicious man-killer just waiting to go off. Suddenly, the subject switched to breathing issues. And yes, if a person "can't breathe" due to a dog being present, then their allergies or asthma will be severe enough to be similarly affected by dust and other animal dander, not to mention chemical fumes.

- Mik McAllister

--- On Sun, 9/16/12, Gopiballava Flaherty <gopiballava at gmail.com> wrote:

From: Gopiballava Flaherty <gopiballava at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Dogs
To: noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
Date: Sunday, September 16, 2012, 9:35 PM


On Sep 16, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Mitchel McAllister <xonimmortal at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have yet to see anyone who has a problem breathing around dogs actually weigh in on this subject. It's hard to gauge how many people are affected this way, if none of them actually speak up.

My wife no longer goes to NB because of the dogs.

I think we need to hear from somebody who brings their dog to NB, or who feels the *personal* desire to have dogs there - not merely people defending the rights of others to bring dogs.

We *know* that there are some people who have problems going to NB due to dogs. I think we need to understand, from the people who want to bring their dogs there, how much this would inconvenience them or how much less pleasant their hacking experience would be.

(I'm not being facetious - I've never owned a dog, so I am not good at understanding the emotional or practical issues of how you feel about having your dog with your or about how most people cope with the fact that dogs are banned in many places.)

> I am allergic to dust and pet dander. My sinuses are also irritated by certain chemical fumes. However, that is *my* problem, not Noisebridge's.

So: Noisebridge should not do anything to make the space more suited for anybody? Ever? Of course not. There has to be balance.

I think that comparing the fumes and chemicals emitted by hacking to the allergens emitted by dogs is an unreasonable comparison. Noisebridge is a *hackerspace*. There will be the airborne results of hacking, or else it will be an *extremely* limited hacking space.

Dogs and other (non-service) companion animals make the place more pleasant for some hackers, but they aren't related to the core purpose of the space.

Here's a thought experiment: If somebody started hacking with a chemical that made, say, 1/3 of people gag but 2/3 of people didn't even notice, would that be acceptable? (Assuming it was not killing people of course). I'd like to think that it would be something that needed long discussion and would have a high chance of being severely restricted because chasing people away is really not very excellent.

Where would you draw the line? That's the question. But I really think there is a line between letting people do anything they want, and not chasing people away.

> I am not going to demand that Noisebridge implement twice-daily cleanings to take care of dust.

No, and neither is anybody else. Just because somebody can demand that you take *unreasonable* measures to accommodate their needs doesn't mean that you should do *nothing*.

> Yes, I, a person allergic to dog dander, am defending the presence of dogs in the space. I made the decision a long time ago to cope with it, because I enjoy the presence of dogs and other furry creatures.

You are aware that some people are more allergic than yourself, yes?

> You also completely disregarded my point regarding the presence of other allergens in the space which exceeds the quantity of dog allergens in the space. I'm going to give you the benefit of a doubt and assume that was inadvertent. I look forward to seeing you correct this lapse.

You made an assertion, not a point. You surely know that people can have different levels of allergic reactions to different compounds, yes? Quantity doesn't matter as much as reaction level.

You also seem to be implying that banning dogs would not significantly help dog-allergic people because the dust is terrible enough to keep them out. Is that correct? If that is what you are claiming, and it's true, then really no further discussion is needed on the topic. However, I don't think you're right for most dog-allergic people.


_______________________________________________
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
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/20120916/b828af9f/attachment-0003.html>