[Noisebridge-discuss] reasoning about the kitchen

[Jeffrey Carl Faden]

She is, actually. Chimes in from time to time.


On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Norman Bradley <pryankster at gmail.com>wrote:

> With all of the shouting and posturing there is a person that is not here
> on the list. Cynthia washes dishes and on occasion helps cook stuff.
>
> When I showed up on Monday she was washing dishes and cleaning up the
> place.
>
> Oh also using one of our public computers close by the kitchen.
>
> I don't think she is on this or another list.
>
> You are entitled to your own opinion.
> You are NOT entitled to your own facts.
>
> Norman
>
>
> On 4/14/2014 3:07 PM, Naomi Most wrote:
>
>> Here is how I came to the conclusion that we should issue an ultimatum
>> for cleaning up the kichen.
>>
>> (I don't care how we got to the situation we're in, and none of the
>> following should be read as implying blame.)
>>
>> Read each point as a statement of fact, but please debate me on
>> individual points if they seem incorrect.
>>
>> 1. Noisebridge's core mission has nothing whatsoever to do with the
>> presence of a kitchen.
>>
>> 2. The kitchen has been stochastically maintained whilst being nearly
>> constantly used.
>>
>> 3. The usage of the kitchen has been largely by those who don't
>> understand the health hazards of misusing a shared community kitchen.
>>
>> (again: please don't read blame into these statements. it doesn't
>> matter "who", it only matters "what".)
>>
>> 4. Because of (2) and (3), the kitchen has become a health hazard.
>> (Many health hazards: mold, vermin, cross-contamination, etc)
>>
>> 5. There are many people who love having a kitchen.
>>
>> 6. There are many people who dislike or don't care about having a kitchen.
>>
>> 7. Those belonging to (6) mostly want to see the kitchen removed.
>>
>> 8. Those belonging to (5) mostly want to keep the kitchen.
>>
>> 9. Health hazards are Bad.  Like, "harassment" Bad.  Like, someone
>> could get a bad disease Bad.
>>
>> ERGO, in the spirit of do-ocracy:
>>
>> 10. Those belonging to (5) ought to be putting work into making the
>> kitchen NOT a health hazard.  The onus falls on the group who uses the
>> space to do something about it.
>>
>> 11. Those belonging to (5) have thus far not shown initiative in
>> protecting the resource.
>>
>> ERGO, in the spirit of do-ocracy:
>>
>> 12. Those belonging to (6) ought to incentivize those belonging to (5)
>> to hurry up and do something about it.
>>
>> OK, does that make sense?
>>
>> This isn't about any authority trying to step in and "punish" people.
>>
>> This is about making it clear that if people want a thing to exist at
>> Noisebridge -- particular one that is fairly peripheral to what
>> Noisebridge is about -- they should take care of it.
>>
>> I have suggested that this group form a "kitchen working group" to sort
>> it out.
>>
>> If it can't be sorted out, I don't think it's unreasonable for those
>> who don't care about having a kitchen but are worried about the health
>> hazards of the kitchen to do-ocratically dismantle it.
>>
>> Thanks for reading.
>>
>> --Naomi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20140415/9cdf7d7f/attachment.html>