[Noisebridge-discuss] Added proposal to current consensus items

[Frantisek Apfelbeck]

"Noisebridge is one of the most excluding organizations I've ever been in. :("

 
When you have time Al, pop in Asia for a bit, after coming back to Noisebridge you will feel like in paradise which is open to all :-)

Sincerely,

Frantisek Algoldor Apfelbeck


biotechnologist&kvasir and hacker


http://www.frantisekapfelbeck.org


"There is no way to peace, peace is the way." Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi




On Wednesday, December 11, 2013 10:35 AM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
 
The overzealousness is probably a feature (though I think a problematic one). The reason Noisebridge has such a tightly-shut gate for membership is because any single member can block consensus items, so you don't want to allow someone in who will overuse it.

Then again, that means Noisebridge has a grueling application process that keeps people away (I know plenty of people who've been at the space for years but have never become members). Noisebridge is one of the most excluding organizations I've ever been in. :(

-Al



On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Madelynn Martiniere <mmartiniere at gmail.com> wrote:

My understanding of the 
proposal is to re-evaluate Associate Membership in February, so no 
definition of what happens if we get rid of them has been provided.
>
>I think having consensus on new members is pretty overzealous. Some 
combination of the two processes might be better (4 week trial period, 
written statement on the wiki, and 4 sponsors seems appropriate to me).
>
>Cheers,
>Madelynn
>
>
>Al Sweigart
>>December 10, 2013 5:12 PM
>>Just to clarify, this would get rid of the concept of associate members? And would not 
convert them to being members? Would they still (technically) be able to come to Noisebridge on their own?
>>
>>
>>Am I right in saying that basically the idea of having associate 
members was to 1) make it easy to become an associate member since no 
single person could block it (rather, you'd have to have a unanimous 
vote to block someone) and 2) on the other side, associate members 
couldn't unilaterally block consensus items?
>>
>>
>>It did always feel like a hack to me. I'd rather 
just have the regular members all become associate members since 
blocking is such a nuclear option, causing people to circumvent the 
consensus process entirely (which leads to drama).
>>
>>
>>-Al
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Kevin Schiesser
>>December 10, 2013 8:48 AM
>>Text:
>>"Noisebridge should attach an expiration period of 90 days,
    beginning October 29, 2013, to the consensus decision to create an Associate Member role. All subsequent mutations of the original consensus should be brought for a second consensus, beginning February 4, 2014. "
>>
>>See https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Current_Consensus_Items for details.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Kevin
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Noisebridge-discuss
 mailing list
>>Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>
>-- 
>
>Madelynn Martiniere
>Community Engineer. Entrepreneur. Geek.
>
>LinkedIn | Twitter | Email
>
> 


_______________________________________________
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/20131211/af60cd4e/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: postbox-contact.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1213 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131211/af60cd4e/attachment-0006.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: postbox-contact.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1163 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131211/af60cd4e/attachment-0007.jpg>