[Noisebridge-discuss] NB Reset

[Johny Radio]

Hey Dan

Firstly, I did not mean to sound confrontational either. Sorry if it 
came across that way.

I'd like to 'reset' my tone here, to something more gentle, and assume 
good intentions. I appreciate the dialog, Dan, and i'd like to move 
toward a mutually-respectful, drama-free dialog.

On 5/31/2013 5:00 AM, Dan Cote wrote:
> Why is it that the people who most want more rules and structure at 
> Noisebridge have so much disdain for the one piece of structure we do 
> have? https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Consensus

Johny Radio: I don't. If you mean any procedural add-ons should go 
through consensus, well that's NB's process, so i have to respect that. 
I'm not suggesting any rules at all, nor changes to consensus.

I'm suggesting:

     -Hacker Hosts at the entrance
     -Orientation process
     -A Mission statement


> DC: It's not that I want Noisebridge to decline into a state of 
> unusable oogleness, ...it's that Noisebridge is one of very few places 
> where a person has some degree of autonomy, while still being 
> supported by a community.

JR: Can you give an example of Noisebridge autonomy that's missing from 
TechShop and Ace Monster Toys and Hacker Dojo?

I enjoy that NB snubs it's nosebridge at corporatization. I enjoy the 
many amazing people I meet at NB. I enjoy that NB is free for those who 
cannot afford membership. I enjoy the stacks of free electronic 
components and the incredible library.

I do not enjoy how certain prominent members (not you) are domineering, 
disrespectful, and abusive toward anyone who dares suggest that NB is 
anything but perfect. This seems directly contrary to the ideals of 
anarchism, liberty, autonomy, community, and consensus.

Please believe that any suggestions for tweaking NB should not be taken 
as an attack or denunciation of NB. If NB was not valuable for me, i 
would not come here as often as i do.


> DC: People who want to share a workshop protected by rules and 
> structure can go to techshop.

JR: I wonder if the "If you don't like it the way it is, then go 
someplace else" posture is a slap in the face to the many good people 
who have made personal contributions of creativity, effort, and money to 
NB over the years, who now have concerns about its recurring problems.


> DC: I advocate for "fixing noisebridge" by doing exactly that. Imagine 
> the noisebridge you want to have and just fucking make it happen.

JR: I feel that does not work for everything, Dan. Do-ocracy is great 
for individual autonomy. But some things cannot happen without 
community-wide support and participation. Resolving chronic problems 
involves agreed-on planning and intent. It's not something one person 
can just "make happen"; it's something we have to do together.


> DC: If we don't stick together, no amount of rules or structure are 
> going to make this community worthwhile.

JR: Not sure what you mean by "stick together".

i'm NOT promoting "rules" or structural changes at all. I'm promoting 
procedure, which is not rules. I'd be happy if we stop using the word 
"rules".

To have hacker hosts welcoming everyone who enters the space is not a 
"rule". Orientation for new participants is not a "rule". Explaining to 
people that if they put food trash in the sinks which do not have a 
disposal, then the sink will clog and someone (usually someone else) 
will have to stick their arms into the filth and scrape out the food, is 
not a "rule".

Consider this: structure is the basis of biological life. Organic 
material is a natural, organized system. At every level, molecular, a 
single organism, a herd, a forest, a planet-- there is deep structure 
and organization in all of life. Without structure, plants and animals 
would not exist. Unless we're going to call nature a fascist, i think 
this demonstrates that organization is not necessarily evil.


> /DC: every person at noisebridge is already empowered to decide what 
> behavior is acceptable or not acceptable/, and to bring that action to 
> a discussion with the community.

JR: What seems to happen, in my 3 years coming to NB, is that people 
bring issues to meetings, but nothing much really comes of it, because, 
in a sense, nothing is allowed to come of it. Except to kick people out. 
Which seems a rather blunt instrument. Soon after, some new people 
engage in the identical unacceptable behavior. And the cycle repeats. 
And eventually, the people who got kicked out slip back in. And the 
cycle repeats. For me, this creates a feeling of powerlessness and 
frustration, not empowerment.


> DC: Imposing rules on a community that was built with very few of them 
> seems almost cruel at this point.

JR: "Imposing" implies some kind of hierarchical power base, forcing 
rules on the rest of us from on-high. I don't think anyone is suggesting 
that.

There are so many wonderful things about the NB community. I think we 
can have the courage to say, "NB is awesome and fantastic, and we're 
grateful it exists, but it's not perfect, and we're clever enough to 
make a few tweaks without ruining what makes it awesome."


> DC: Many noisebridgers have concerns with any new rules or structure. 
> This necessitates addressing those concerns before the plan can proceed.

JR: I think it might be revealing to do a poll.


> DC: This latest push for rules and structure seems to be disregarding 
> those very concerns and blaming those with concerns for the problems 
> created by other people.

JR: "Latest", meaning it keeps coming up? So, maybe there's something to 
it.

I certainly would not want to disregard anyone's concerns-- that's why 
we're having a discourse. I feel the discussion list enables discussion 
that can go deeper, and involve the wider community, than meetings alone.

I think many noisebridgers have concerns with the state of things at NB. 
To say "if you don't like it, go someplace else" disregards their concerns.


> DC: I apologize for the earlier post, I had a moment where I was 
> filled with rage at the idea of cleaning the elevator by myself. The 
> post was unnecessarily obnoxious.

JR. No worries.


Best wishes, Dan.


Johny Radio
Stick It In Your Ear!