[Noisebridge-discuss] The legalities.
jjuran at gmail.com
Sat Apr 5 06:29:30 UTC 2014
On Apr 4, 2014, at 9:33 PM, Al Sweigart wrote:
> At which point the people who use Noisebridge as a part time
> residence will tell you they don't reside at Noisebridge, they just
> "sleep-hack" or "rest their eyes".
> Until you prevent people from sleeping at Noisebridge, they will
> continue to live at Noisebridge. Until you have some negative
> consequence like temporary or permanent bans, people will still
> sleep at Noisebridge. Until you get rid of consensus, Kevin will
> prevent any negative consequences for sleeping at Noisebridge.
Does fulfilling our lease agreements or carrying out other legal
responsibilities require consensus? I've never seen a discussion of
whether we should pay the rent this month; that seems to just happen
at the treasurer's discretion. If we bring up "non-hackers are
forbidden from selling drugs while asleep on the fire escape after
hours without a sponsor" for consensus, and someone blocks, does that
mean it's all good?
Consensus or failure to reach same doesn't absolve us of legal
obligations. Noisebridge the hacker community is run by consensus.
Noisebridge the legal entity is governed by the board. If the board
is able to carry out its duties by doing nothing but delegate to the
community, awesome. If not, it's up to them to take action. Think
of it as an immune system response.
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss