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

Alan Rockefeller alanrockefeller at gmail.com
Tue Oct 22 20:31:24 UTC 2013

When I first read about this proposal I thought that it was an additional
tool that could be appled as needed to kick out people who were just
bumming around and not working on anything.    I thought that it was
understood that if they were being productive and not bothering anyone that
they would not be asked to leave when their sponsor does.

It appears that it is being taken too seriously, and that good people are
being asked to leave.   That is unexcellent.

If I was hacking something and someone asked me to leave even though I was
not bothering anyone, I would be pissed.   And that is not a good way to
treat people new to the space.

How many hackers do we have to kick out in order to get the people that are
just using nb as a roof to leave?

It seems that this policy is adding unnecessary rules that affect both good
and bad people.   Perhaps it should be adjusted somehow so if someone is
soldering or coding and their sponsoring member leaves, people do not feel
the need to make the productive person leave?

I would almost rather have people sitting around doing nothing than have a
policy that forces good people out the door.

Perhaps a better solution is to ask people who are loitering to leave?
Perhaps a no loitering policy or guideline?   Or no loitering from 11pm
until 9am?

Or maybe we don‘t a guideline and should just start asking people to leave
and come back to a meeting any time we notice someone using the space
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131022/10c3655e/attachment.html>

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list