[Noisebridge-discuss] Sunday morning sleeper.

Al Sweigart asweigart at gmail.com
Mon Dec 9 17:42:55 UTC 2013

You know, for all the booting out of early morning sleepers from the space
I do, I'll say this: I've never asked anyone during the day if they're a
member of the space, or pointed out to anyone that Noisebridge is a
members-only space. Even I feel uncomfortable doing that. It's completely
ineffective at keeping people from treating the space like their living
room instead of their workshop.

I pitched the members-only hours years ago to curb the sleeping problem (I
think it directly addresses the issue), but it was shot down because it
would limit access to Noisebridge (even though I said people could become
members and then go on hiatus if member dues were the problem.) I still
support non-public hours for the space.


On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Jeffrey Carl Faden <jeffreyatw at gmail.com>wrote:

> So I've been meaning to ask - how has the new associate membership idea
> been working? One of the main drives of the concept was to prevent sleeping
> by only allowing members or vouched guests in, but this seems to have
> failed.
> It's a failure on my part as well as on any other associate member who has
> entertained people in the space but not asked them to leave along with
> them. I don't think any of my students are sleeping at the space after
> classes, but I haven't been explicitly asking anyone to leave. I either
> don't feel comfortable, or simply forget to ask.
> If people are feeling safer and the amount of violence and drug abuse has
> gone down, then that's enough to warrant keeping these policies in place.
> But if the limited-hours approach was shot down in order for associate
> membership to take its place, it certainly seems less effective in
> preventing sleepers.
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure if there are any members who say they are fine with people
>> crashing overnight at Noisebridge (please speak up if you are. I think Leif
>> maybe? Or maybe he thinks napping is fine but overnight sleeping isn't?
>> Either way, I don't want to speak for him.) As for the sleepers themselves,
>> I think one has been an associate member, but the rest aren't members. And
>> by far the majority of people who come to Noisebridge don't sleep here
>> themselves.
>> Meanwhile, the opposition to people sleeping at the space is pretty vocal
>> and consistent. The hacker stackers were taken down because they weren't
>> just being used for naps. Don't confuse the exception for the rule.
>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 8:44 AM, spinach williams <
>> spinach.williams at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> clearly, the community thinks different things about it, because part of
>>> the community is still doing it
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20131209/d74fc726/attachment.html>

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list