[Noisebridge-discuss] Keeping associate members in their place

[Al Sweigart]

I partially agree with Mike, but I don't care for the way he phrases it.
The first paragraph is a textbook tone policing argument, which I don't
mind except that Mike doesn't argue against the specific things I bring up.
(And looking back over my email, I don't know what part of it he sees as a
"threat".)

I'm glad he agrees with the consensus proposal: Madelynn and I both wrote
it and we did put a lot of thought into it. You can understand my
frustration when it gets shot down after a few minutes and no compromise or
alternative is suggested by the blockers.

I'm willing to have these many reasonable conversations with people, it's
why I ended my last email specifically encouraging people to chime in even
if they disagree. But I'm also being unequivocal about why I think some
people don't want this conversation to take place and their real motivation
for blocking change. If my view is inaccurate, I'd like to see people
defend why rather than just saying "stop sounding so negative."

-Al


On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Johny Radio <johnyradio at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 12/18/2013 5:34 PM, Mike Schachter wrote:
>
>> Positive change can happen over time, after many reasonable conversations
>> between many people.
>>
>
> Well put, Mike!
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131218/e9c1b4c0/attachment-0003.html>