[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Bylaws

[Naomi Most]

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