[Noisebridge-discuss] Hello. I think we a need a new Mission Statement.
pnaomi at gmail.com
Sun Apr 6 21:28:57 UTC 2014
Well, again, you don't need to see it as "either or" (like, we can't
do anything until we do THIS), nor do you need to see it as a singular
Mission Statement (that's an implementation detail).
There's nothing "wrong" with the current Mission Statement, except
that it doesn't help in any way, shape, or form in our discussions.
That means we're not using this valuable tool effectively.
I'm willing to bet that no discussions at Noisebridge involve
reference to the Mission Statement ("wait, let's think, does this
improve Noisebridge in a way consistent with the Mission Statement, or
should we find another way?").
You may say, so what? We'll just get arguments over the Mission
Well, maybe. But what Johny's arguing for is a community-based effort
to hash out what Noisebridge means to itself and to the world, which
implies a journey of building understanding and trust in each other.
The journey is just as important as the destination. This is a chance
for the people who want to continue investing time and effort in
Noisebridge to find renewed purpose in its existence, and build
bridges between previously disconnected individuals and groups.
I mean, are we a Hackerspace Vending Machine, or are we something
greater than that? I'd argue "greater", but sometimes it's hard for
me to see that anyone is interested in more than becoming another Tech
Hoping for a thoughtful discussion here...
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Kevin <bfb at riseup.net> wrote:
> On April 6, 2014 9:51:38 AM PDT, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Correction: It's not a "manifesto". Johny's made a wise suggestion,
>> and it's shared by several others who I hope will step into the
>> discussion despite being nay-sayed by the "why don't you just" types.
>> Silly me, trying to start a discussion topic on noisebridge-dicusss...
>> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > That's fine, but you guys are seeing this as an "either or". It's
>> > really a "yes and".
>> > The point of the Mission Statement is to clarify the goals of NB as
>> > organization. It will be easier, after a process of consenting to
>> > agree on a new Mission Statement, to agree on how to deal with
>> > subsidiary issues like that.
>> > But, you know what? I'm going to let Johny Radio defend his
>> > from here on out.
>> > --Naomi
>> > On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 9:00 PM, Josh Juran <jjuran at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Apr 5, 2014, at 6:48 PM, William Sargent wrote:
>> >>> It's just more talk.
>> >>> How about stopping people from sleeping at Noisebridge?
>> >> Noisebridge's mission statement has never been a factor in whether
>> >> attended. On the other hand, people using Noisebridge as a shelter
>> >> definitely discouraged me from going.
>> >> Josh
>> > --
>> > Naomi Theora Most
>> > naomi at nthmost.com
>> > +1-415-728-7490
>> > skype: nthmost
>> > http://twitter.com/nthmost
>> Naomi Theora Most
>> naomi at nthmost.com
>> skype: nthmost
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> This is an excellent effort. I'm not convinced that the "mission statement" is the right place to start hacking. It's common for nonprofits to have several statements, each with increasing level of detail. Does the mission statement truly need revision? Or do we need greater clarity from an additional statement?
> There's an effort being made to meet and discuss this week. We've narrowed down times to Tuesday/Thursday early evening. Feel welcome to chime in with your availability. It's good to know who wants to participate, even if you cannot make the times noted above. We can also accommodate remote participants with advance notice.
Naomi Theora Most
naomi at nthmost.com
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss