[Noisebridge-discuss] Kevin's proposal to expire the Associate Member role.

[Gregory Dillon]

agreed, for me, associate membership is better than -non associate.   AND
maybe associate member  better than capital M membership because it is not
 so  "drama" inclined.


On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Curtis Gagliardi <
gagliardi.curtis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Second class by any other name...  Anyway, it beats being third class like
> us non associates.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Gregory Dillon <gregorydillon at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> please don’t call me second class, I’m happy with my associate
>> membership,
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 2:14 PM, bfb <bfb at riseup.net> wrote:
>>
>>>  Al, please consider an alternative interpretation of this proposal
>>> based on the following claims.
>>>
>>> Great changes to noisebridge standard operating protocol:
>>> 1. benefit from a trial period
>>> 2. benefit from significant (unanimous) community buy-in
>>> 3. benefit from the learnings made during the trial period
>>>
>>> In addition, this particular policy suffers from perceived lack of
>>> legitimacy due to the small present member count (4) and poor adherence to
>>> process (member dues amendment).
>>>
>>> Finally, the proposal in question follows precedent set by the button to
>>> keypad consensus and the anti harassment policy.
>>>
>>> -Kevin
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original message --------
>>> From: Al Sweigart
>>> Date:12/13/2013 13:52 (GMT-08:00)
>>> To: noisebridge-discuss
>>> Subject: [Noisebridge-discuss] Kevin's proposal to expire the Associate
>>> Member role.
>>>
>>> So Kevin proposed a consensus item at the last meeting that would expire
>>> the Associate Member role on January 29 unless it passed a second round of
>>> consensus before then. This is basically the same as the previous consensus
>>> item that was blocked on 12/3 to invalidate the original Associate Member
>>> consensus item, except the invalidation takes place in the future with the
>>> opportunity to prevent the invalidation of the consensus item by re-passing
>>> it through consensus. (Insert Inception joke here.)
>>>
>>> I'd like to talk about two things:
>>>
>>> First, I think that Noisebridge having two tiers of membership is kind
>>> of crap, especially for all the non-hierarchical rhetoric that is preached.
>>> Associate members are second-class citizens that can't block, meaning they
>>> have no power whatsoever in actual decision making. (And influence is no
>>> substitute for power.)
>>>
>>> But I also understand why it was created, rather than just easily let
>>> people become Noisebridge members. Being a member gives someone the Nuclear
>>> Option of a unilateral veto, which the membership wants to be very careful
>>> with. But this ends up excluding a lot of people (again, which goes against
>>> the "radical inclusiveness" rhetoric we preach). Sam and Robin's
>>> memberships getting blocked at the last meeting are examples of this.
>>>
>>> Second, Kevin's proposal is a hack. With Noisebridge's current political
>>> structure, it's far easier to block something then pass it. So if you want
>>> to abolish Associate Members, it's easier to add an expiration date which
>>> would need consensus to avoid, rather than try to get consensus to directly
>>> abolish it. Kevin's proposal effectively tries to do the same thing as the
>>> last proposal, but in an indirect way so that it will be less likely to be
>>> blocked.
>>>
>>> Consensus is problematic. It encourages Noisebridge to be closed off to
>>> new people, it creates an "old guard" of members who hold the actual power,
>>> and it encourages people to circumvent it anyway. It's no wonder why
>>> there's so much drama at Noisebridge.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts on consensus, associate members, and/or Kevin's proposal?
>>>
>>> -Al
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>>
>


-- 
Let's stay in touch.  Greg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131213/2f651fcb/attachment-0003.html>