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

John Ellis neurofog at gmail.com
Wed Oct 23 00:31:59 UTC 2013

Hi Hannah,

I'm not opposed to multi-tier membership. I am opposed to asking people to
leave after 11:00 PM when they are otherwise making excellent use of the

Also, when a Member blocks a Consensus item, the expectation is that they
discuss their concerns and if they still feel strongly against it, then
actually block it.

If a member is up for banning by consensus, they can't block themselves
from being banned so its "consensus minus one"


On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Hannah Grimm <dharlette at gmail.com> wrote:

> Personally, I think the new rule is great (and this is someone who is not
> a member).  I'm also just fine with there being a sort of "junior member"
> state that is enough to be allowed in after hours, which should be easier
> to achieve and does NOT have the right to block.  The ability to block is
> an incredibly powerful one, and it only takes two jerkoffs with Membership
> to cause havoc and defend each other from attempts to remove them.  We need
> to be careful about handing that out; we've had issues with people who
> don't really understand consensus blocking things in a way that is highly
> detrimental to the community.  I like there being three levels: visitors,
> who need someone to accompany them, members, who can visit without a
> chaperone, and Members, who can block and who pay (because paying gives us
> a way of getting rid of them if they're ever late on their dues).
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Alan Rockefeller <
> alanrockefeller at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I suggest we keep the policy and perhaps expand it to all hours, but add
>> “unless they are hacking something“.
>> Or add the language “consider not enforcing this on people who are
>> clearly being productive.“
>> I love the idea of kicking out the bums and have kicked a more than a few
>> out myself, I just hate to see a rigid one size fits all policy applied to
>> people who are using the space for its intended purpose.
>> I worry that people who are asked to leave while being excellent might
>> not return.   That is not the intent of this policy at all, but it is bound
>> to happen given the current language.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131022/bece4069/attachment.html>

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list