[Noisebridge-discuss] Membership Status and Consensus
asweigart at gmail.com
Tue Nov 26 21:28:47 UTC 2013
Tom, I'd like to publicly thank you for doing the mostly thankless job of
secretary. The membership is passing more and more consensus items and
shaping Noisebridge's culture in new (and I'd say, improved and long-waited
for) directions, and having an accurate member list is becoming a more
important part of you doing the basics of your job as secretary.
It's easy and comfortable to be the dissenter in a place like Noisebridge,
it's less so to actually manage the day-to-day affairs in the actual space.
There's no shortage of doomsday prophets trying to shout down every move of
anyone who challenges Noisebridge's status quo. I'm glad you are made of
You have my axe (or more appropriately needed for Noisebridge, my mop).
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Jacob Appelbaum <jacob at appelbaum.net>wrote:
> Danny O'Brien:
> > Just as an FYI, I was moderator at the last meeting, and proxy blocked
> > you Jake wrt the time requirement part of putting a wiki page up (as did
> > the other Jake). I said at the time that I see no point in discussing at
> > meeting a proposal that is being remotely blocked, and it would be more
> > productive to continue the consensus discussion between the proposer and
> > the blocking member outside of meeting.
> Thanks for that Danny.
> > I would add that you both seem to me to be acting in good faith, and are
> > closer to consensus than it might appear; your differences are being
> > accentuated by the mode of communication.
> There are some things that concern me but generally, I think that this
> is probably correct.
> All the best,
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss