[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Bylaws

[Al Sweigart]

You changed the subject away from "I believe we can/can't ignore the
bylaws" to how you feel about changing the bylaws.

No, seriously. This isn't some grand evil scheme or trick. I just want to
know that the next time the board votes 4 to 1 against you that you won't
pull a "well, this board vote doesn't count because I block" even though
the bylaws say board decisions are made by majority vote.

Prediction: You're next email won't answer this question either.


On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:

> There is no "yes or no" question implied here:
>
> > So, I'm of the mindset that the Noisebridge bylaws are not suggestions,
> but rules that cannot be ignored or are somehow optional. Anyone else like
> to make a public record if they feel the same way or the opposite?
>
> You were asking if people "feel the same way or the opposite".  I replied:
>
> > "I am not for changing the bylaws, at all.  Don't see any need to."
>
> How does this leave wiggle room?
>
> Whatever.
>
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Nah, it's just that it's a really simple question but your lengthy answer
> > didn't give a straight yes or no. And the other times I've asked you've
> also
> > dodged it. Even your current answer of "Did I ever imply otherwise?"
> leaves
> > wiggle room for you to later say, "I never said we had to follow the
> > bylaws."
> >
> > Mostly I worry that you make up your own rules for whatever is
> convenient.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Did I ever imply otherwise?
> >>
> >> You're clearly setting up for something I fear won't pan out for you
> >> the way you're hoping...
> >>
> >> --Naomi
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > So Naomi, does that mean you agree that the Noisebridge bylaws can't
> be
> >> > ignored?
> >> >
> >> > On Apr 6, 2014 6:15 PM, "Naomi Gmail" <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Good constructive question.
> >> >>
> >> >> If we can't agree on the bylaws as a firm basis, then we have no
> >> >> foundation at all, and nothing we do in writing or at meetings will
> >> >> help to
> >> >> bring this disparate community together.
> >> >>
> >> >> I am not for changing the bylaws, at all.  Don't see any need to.
> >> >>
> >> >> Of possible relevance:
> >> >>
> >> >> In proposing a rewrite -- or better stated, a "renewal"-- of a
> Mission
> >> >> Statement, it wasn't my intention to imply a rewrite to the bylaws.
> >> >> Only a
> >> >> rewriting (or not!) of what appears on the wiki as the explanation of
> >> >> what
> >> >> Noisebridge "does" and why, and more importantly, a process of coming
> >> >> to the
> >> >> agreement that helps the community understand itself better.
> >> >>
> >> >> --Naomi
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > On Apr 6, 2014, at 4:47 PM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > So, I'm of the mindset that the Noisebridge bylaws are not
> >> >> > suggestions,
> >> >> > but rules that cannot be ignored or are somehow optional. Anyone
> else
> >> >> > like
> >> >> > to make a public record if they feel the same way or the opposite?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -Al
> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> >> >> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> >> >> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Naomi Theora Most
> >> naomi at nthmost.com
> >> +1-415-728-7490
> >>
> >> skype: nthmost
> >>
> >> http://twitter.com/nthmost
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Naomi Theora Most
> naomi at nthmost.com
> +1-415-728-7490
>
> skype: nthmost
>
> http://twitter.com/nthmost
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20140407/3ae67b62/attachment.html>