[Noisebridge-discuss] amendments to membership proposal - associate members and 24/7 hours

Kevin Schiesser bfb at riseup.net
Tue Oct 22 04:30:08 UTC 2013

Jake and Liz,

I am concerned the latest proposal will wrap the whole experience in 
"kick people out" time, spiraling down a positive feedback loop until, 
as Liz points out, the space is unoccupied for many hours at a time. I 
have a similar goal of making every moment a time when people coming to 
Noisebridge get a proper introduction, but a different way of going 
about it. Along side general excellence and welcoming do-ocracy, I 
support the proposal to eliminate money from membership.

Rather then create an air of power-over or grave responsibility, we 
could offer full membership to people who want to commit time rather 
than money. I really like the idea of de-coupling membership from dues, 
while also requesting that some commitment be made upon becoming a 
member (money or time). I can see members of the future sending a wiki 
Users link to the treasurer every month with a sort-of public timesheet 
or 'this is what my service to noisebridge has been' documentation.

A reasonable time commitment includes taking a weekly docent shift, 
teaching a class, putting on events, etc... All of which attract more 
excellent people to noisebridge.


On 10/21/2013 08:50 PM, Liz Henry wrote:
> Hmmm. What happens if all the members leave, for example in the 
> evening? Does that ever happen?
> - Liz
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Jake <jake at spaz.org 
> <mailto:jake at spaz.org>> wrote:
>     Kevin,
>     My goal is to remove the event of 23:00 being "kick people out"
>     time. Instead, my goal is to make every moment a time when people
>     coming to noisebridge get a proper introduction, and a connection
>     to a Member of noisebridge.  As long as that happens, people can
>     be in the space any time.  They just need to have someone who is a
>     Member in the space say that they're vouched for.
>     Having people fill out a form does nothing by itself.  As the
>     proposal, which passed, is worded, the application needs
>     signatures of at least two Members of noisebridge in order for the
>     applicant to be entitled to the space in the "after hours" without
>     a live sponsor.
>     If you are a member, you are welcome to personally vouch for
>     anyone you see in the space.  When they are asked (for example by
>     Monad) if they have a sponsor, they will mention you, and if you
>     are present, Monad can talk to you if he has any concerns about
>     them.  It is a simple solution.
>     If you are not a member, perhaps it is because of the financial
>     requirements of being a Member, and this week's proposal will help
>     by creating Associate Members who can host guests (and sign
>     applications) while not being required to make financial
>     contributions.  You should become an Associate Member so you can
>     help people feel welcome at Noisebridge.
>     My hope is that by removing the special time period, we will
>     embrace this new system of excellence at all times, so that the
>     only time people will be asked to leave is if they are somehow
>     detracting from the space and there is no Member present who wants
>     to stick up for them.
>     -jake
>     Kevin wrote:
>     I was on docent shift last night. I asked one fella I found drinking
>     beer in the stairway to leave. Two folks filed membership applications
>     (under the "vouched for" section of the binder), and remained at
>     Noisebridge after 23:00. I recognized both people as having been
>     coming
>     to NB for several months, and neither had heard of the new policy. All
>     told, when I left there were three or four active hackers in the
>     space.
>     On the way out, Monad commented that one day Noisebridge will be
>     welcoming to activists again. Thinking of Cypherpunks, open-source
>     hackers/contributers, freedom on the web, freedom of information,
>     etc...
>     This resonated with me, and I will consider further the impact of
>     proposals such as this in these terms. Will limiting access to NB
>     attract activists? Will the proposal reduce disruption, disturbance,
>     theft to facilitate hacking? Are there better ways for NB to be more
>     welcoming?
>     At the meeting where this proposal was consensed, John and I both
>     strongly stood aside. As such, I have been steering many to file
>     sponsorship paperwork to avoid being asked to leave. One person I've
>     spoken with is adverse to filing any paperwork at all, and has not
>     been
>     at NB form 23:00-10:00. As regards the bug last night, that's my
>     failure
>     for not introducing myself and the membership binder to everyone that
>     came in the door. I'm not convinced that extending the outage time
>     will
>     bring more excellent hackers to NB.
>     --Kevin
>     On 10/21/2013 05:26 PM, John Ellis wrote:
>         HI Jake,
>         I didn't think this original proposal was a good idea.
>         Problems like
>         you mention below, with genuine hackers being asked to leave, are
>         bound to happen at various times.
>         On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Jake <jake at spaz.org
>         <http://spaz.org>
>         <mailto:jake <mailto:jake> at spaz.org <http://spaz.org>>> wrote:
>             tl;dr at the end of this post is the amended consensus
>         item for
>             this week
>             I just found out that an excellen
>     _______________________________________________
>     Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>     Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>     <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>     https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> -- 
> Liz Henry
> lizhenry at gmail.com <mailto:lizhenry at gmail.com>
> "Electric ladies will you sleep or will you preach?" -- Janelle Monae
> "Without models, it's hard to work; without a context, difficult to
> evaluate; without peers, nearly impossible to speak." -- Joanna Russ

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131021/70c12f91/attachment.html>

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list