[Noisebridge-discuss] The legalities.

Josh Juran 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 mailing list