[Noisebridge-discuss] The legalities.

[Al Sweigart]

Hey, follow up question Kevin. You wanted to add, "Noisebridge supports
fair usage. We agree as participants of Noisebridge to be excellent." to
the house rules proposal. https://github.com/noisebridge/bureaucracy/pull/27

Would you consider sleeping in the space to be "fair usage"? And if so, why
not just try to pass a consensus proposal with the more direct language of
"sleeping is allowed in the space"?


On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:

> I didn't say you did, Kevin. Heck, you've never had to. That's the great
> thing about consensus and why you want to keep it: not only can you
> unilaterally block something but everyone knows you can so they don't even
> bother bringing it up. And if not you, then J.C. or someone else.
>
> Sleeping at the space has been a problem people have complained about *for
> years*, but no one took the obvious step of proposing a consensus item
> until Tom's recent "house rules" item which, surprise surprise, has been
> delayed or had attempts to water it down with vague language. (And actually
> banning people, even temporarily, for sleeping at the space has been
> completely out of the picture.)
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:00 AM, Kevin <bfb at riseup.net> wrote:
>
>> On April 4, 2014 9:33:16 PM PDT, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> 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.
>> > On Apr 4, 2014 11:22 AM, "B Perez" <knighty04 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hear hear! +1
>> > >
>> > > Sent from my iPhone
>> > >
>> > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 8:52 PM, Norman Bradley <pryankster at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > It has been mentioned several times that people living at NB
>> > violates
>> > > our lease. It is actually a bit more complicated. After looking up
>> > how 2169
>> > > Mission is zoned. I found that it is not zoned for residential. A
>> > place to
>> > > start looking is at
>> > > http://www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=2771#findzoning . That is
>> > the
>> > > San Francisco Planning Department and you can find a list of
>> > changes,
>> > > permits, and even how much things cost. Our place "Appears eligible
>> > for
>> > > listing in the California Register of Historical Resources."
>> > > >
>> > > > I am NOT a lawyer so this is just a guess after looking at the
>> > online
>> > > records. I think that what they say is that floor 1 is zoned for
>> > food sales
>> > > and floors 2 and 3 are light industrial. To allow sleeping / living
>> > in the
>> > > space will at least require new permits from the, Planning Dept.,
>> > Fire
>> > > Dept., and Health Dept. as well as convincing the landlord.
>> > > >
>> > > > I'm not sure how long flogging this issue will continue, but, in
>> > my
>> > > opinion it is not up for debate. It is spelled out in both zoning
>> > law and
>> > > our lease. Our object should be how do we stop it not how much
>> > should we
>> > > allow.
>> > > >
>> > > > You are entitled to your own opinion.
>> > > > You are NOT entitled to your own facts.
>> > > >
>> > > > Norman
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> > > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> > > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>> ^^ lol Al. I have never blocked a single proposal to ban someone from
>> Noisebridge. You're welcome to persist in this fantasy as long as you like.
>> Let's move forward with honesty, openness and empathy.
>>
>> -Kevin
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20140405/a3c88e1b/attachment.html>