[Noisebridge-discuss] Consensus proposal: renaming member categories

[Charles Tang]

Now we are talking rhetoric,

Indeed, this isn't just a question of an aquarium. But the discourse of
control of the rhetorical space.

But, the issue was spurred by the aquarium. The influences and the dynamics
of the schemas involved here are deep-seated, and clearly run back for
years. They are indeed, hegemonic, by binding together individuals in a
power struggle for social dominance.

Don't we have more pressing concerns here? Like maybe, getting money for
the organization or like avoiding people stealing from the place. I gave
some organizational information to get more money for noise bridge. Still,
I haven't received a response from TomAl. Because they are allowing the
rhetorical space to dominate a pragmatic discussion.

You could have had your laser cutter fixed by now.

Also, why does my Wiki page have to be updated by an "Anonymous," I'm not a
financial institution here, people. You don't have to wear your masks for
an aquarium, you can just put it on the mailing list discussion topic.
Moreover, it doesn't need to be edited for "popular culture," either.

Regardless, I thought the process of having a new member in the space was
to give a tour, then do all the formal stuff. No one gave me a tour. I was
just told about the wiki and do-ocracy.

So, based off of these interactions, I'm going to engage in do-ocracy,
despite the trolling, and fighting and build a fish tank somewhere with
controllers and pvc pipe, leds, potentially a chiller unit built from some
old computer parts and various other forms of hackery.




On 8 December 2013 19:07, Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 8 December 2013 18:49, Charles Tang <cjtang1 at asu.edu> wrote:
> > Uh FYI, I have my own apartment. . . .
> >
> > Regardless, why are we still poisoning the well. None of this is
> > tangentially related to what is clearly a hegemonic structure here. One,
> > that is unwilling to accept ideas, and if and when those ideas are
> brought
> > up, individuals serve to advance themselves in an non-pragmatic fashion.
> >
> > Why are we all talking to each other like this because of an Aquarium.
>
> You're talking like this about an aquarium because the people involved
> in a space that tries to openly accept everyone from all walk of life,
> surprisingly, have wildly different ideas about what, how, when, why
> and where to communicate. It's expected to be full of .. well, what
> you see here.
>
> The aquarium is practically irrelevant.
>
> (The practicalities of attempting to shepherd communication when faced
> with this kind of wildly different people and the subsequent
> self-organizing principles that humans seem to fall into is left as an
> exercise to the reader.)
>
>
> -adrian
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131208/c94ac553/attachment-0003.html>