[Noisebridge-discuss] Who do we want to exclude? [Drama]

Andrew Byrne andrew at pachakutech.com
Sat Apr 13 03:46:09 UTC 2013


On Apr 12, 2013 3:42 PM, "Mitchel McAllister" <xonimmortal at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> "People standing on the fire escape are obstructions" are my words. They
are also common sense.
>
It is all so clear now.

> Here's an experiment. Stand in the doorway between the stairs and the
space. Don't move. See how many people can go through the doorway.
>
For how long?

> Now, try this: lock the door to the space, from the inside, as is
required by law for doors to a fire escape. See how many people can come in.
>
After I open it from the inside to get out, the same amount as when I was
standing there?

> Even if you maintain (absent common sense) that people standing on the
fire escape are not obstructions, they would still be unable to come back
into the space if we adhere to the requirement that the door be locked so
that people can not enter the space from the fire escape.
>
> And yes, re-entering is entering. Re-enter means "to enter again".
>
I take it Miriam-Webster is your friend here, too? You miss the forest for
the trees...

> What I am seeing, far in excess of suggested solutions, is a bunch of
people kicking their heels and screaming "you can't make me".
>
I was the one who complained about smoking there, I'd even argue that yours
is a useful myth, if it wasn't so transparently bullshit. The conversion
can't go anywhere productive if we can't respect each other enough to be
honest with each other; who will obey a simple " no smoking in places that
shit on our neighbors" rule when it is backed up by calls to the sf civic
codes and a dictionary? It's delusional, and a violence to others who are
trying to create a sane, safe co- worming environment. The same effect can
be had by more reified argument e.g. being excellent to each other, the
nice grocers, the neighbors, but no, crackpot legal theories slouch into
our conversation and derail any agreement.

> Guess what? Throwing tantrums isn't excellent either, unless you accept
the expanded and broadened meaning of "whatever one wants to do, regardless
of how it affects others".
>
Speaking charitably, making shit up is either unexcellent or senility. I
feel like you've drained hours from my life I'm not getting back. -dru

>
> - Reverend Mik McAllister
> ________________________________
> "You can see the summit but you can't reach it
> Its the last piece of the puzzle but you just can't make it fit
> Doctor says you're cured but you still feel the pain
> Aspirations in the clouds but your hopes go down the drain"
>  - Howard Jones, "No One Is To Blame"
> ________________________________
> Purveyor of Subversive Fiction
> http://www.prismandink.com
> http://www.lunatextpublications.com
>
> --- On Fri, 4/12/13, Andrew Byrne <andrew at pachakutech.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: Andrew Byrne <andrew at pachakutech.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Who do we want to exclude? [Drama]
>> To: "Mitchel McAllister" <xonimmortal at yahoo.com>
>> Cc: "NoiseBridge Discuss" <noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>,
"Aly Nb" <alykaplan at gmail.com>
>> Date: Friday, April 12, 2013, 3:18 PM
>>
>>
>> " people standing on the fire escape are obstructions" <-- are those
your words, or the law? If the latter, then I would point out a seemingly
glaring confound in the law, if the former, your confusion; it would seem
the quoted law even makes an example of cases (not ours) where people are
often to be found. The only way I can see that line making a lick of sense
is if one can legally occupy /only/ Useable Open Spaces, which is not
really the domain of the fire code. It's not like it's a designated smoking
area or something. -dru
>>
>> On Apr 12, 2013 2:24 PM, "Mitchel McAllister" <xonimmortal at yahoo.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>> --- On Fri, 4/12/13, Aly Kaplan <alykaplan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > I'd like to see the law that says this is illegal -- it certainly
isn't
>>> > according to SF Fire Code.
>>> >
>>> > However, it is always good to be excellent to your neighbors.It may
also
>>> > be prohibited on your lease.
>>>
>>> Retrieved from
http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&vid=amlegal:sanfrancisco_ca
>>>
>>> San Francisco Fire Code 1030.2.1 [Chapter 10 "Means of Egress"]
>>>    Fire escapes and related balconies, ladders, landings, and operating
devices shall not be obstructed in any manner. No object shall be stored on
or attached to a fire escape without the approval of the fire code official.
>>>
>>> San Francisco Building Inspection Commission (BIC) Codes Sec. 908
>>>    All safety devices or equipment provided for in this chapter shall
be maintained in good repair at all times. Fire escapes shall be kept clear
and unobstructed and be readily accessible at all times. Upon inspection,
the property owner, or authorized agent, shall demonstrate to the Director
or designated personnel, that all existing fire escapes are fully
operational and properly maintained. Upon completion of the inspection, all
existing fire escapes shall be secured pursuant to Section 1110.3.1. of the
San Francisco Fire Code.
>>>
>>> San Francisco Planning code Article 1.2 SEC. 135.  USABLE OPEN SPACE
FOR DWELLING UNITS AND GROUP HOUSING, R, NC, MIXED USE, C, AND M DISTRICTS.
 (f)(3)     Fire Escapes as Usable Open Space. Normal fire escape grating
shall not be considered suitable surfacing for usable open space. The steps
of a fire escape stairway or ladder, and any space less than six feet deep
between such steps and a wall of the building, shall not be credited as
usable open space. But the mere potential use of a balcony area for an
emergency fire exit by occupants of other dwelling units (or bedrooms in
group housing) shall not prevent it from being credited as usable open
space on grounds of lack of privacy or usability.
>>>
>>> People standing on the fire escape are obstructions. Fire escapes are
not open space.
>>>
>>> However, I also noticed that we are in violation because the fire
escape door is not locked against people entering from outside, which seems
to be the focus of a lot more codes, ordinances, and case law.
>>>
>>>
>>> - Reverend Mik McAllister
>>> "You can see the summit but you can't reach it
>>> Its the last piece of the puzzle but you just can't make it fit
>>> Doctor says you're cured but you still feel the pain
>>> Aspirations in the clouds but your hopes go down the drain"
>>>  - Howard Jones, "No One Is To Blame"
>>> Purveyor of Subversive Fiction
>>> http://www.prismandink.com
>>> http://www.lunatextpublications.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20130413/80940439/attachment.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list