[Noisebridge-discuss] "Banning" discussion tonight

Wed Feb 26 00:33:13 UTC 2014

Retributive Utilitarian

Restorative 

All I see here is semi-retributive desire, cow moos too much, cow should go to the ban-hammer factory.

How are we defining harassment for those who just have a difference in opinion. 

Cow moos to much and it's harassment, cow should be silenced and go to the ban-hammer factory. 

No theory can explain cow. Cow is just different than the rest of the cows because cow moos too much.

Cowrights are diminished, cow is not allow to the field with the rest of the cows. Send any other cow to the ban-hammer factory, as cows become less. Any moo is problematic. Consequently, all cows eventually go to the ban-hammer-factory.

It's a slippery ice cream scoop and were all about to fall off the cone.

I should hope that, I, another cow, doesn't anger vegans for my product. For then, I moo too much too. I may be the next cow on the list. 

I'd be really sad.
—
Sent from Mailbox for iPhone

On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:

> I would like for Lee to be at the meeting as well.
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Mitch, Lee Sonko knew about the banning proposal. I had personally been in
>> discussion with him about it. I was surprised that he didn't show up to the
>> meeting.
>>
>> And this is why Noisebridge isn't a safe space: after months of on-and-off
>> harassment, Tom brings up this consensus proposal, it's on the docket for
>> weeks, and actually manages to pass consensus. Yet after all these hurdles
>> were overcome, Lee can defy his ban and come back into the space and debate
>> his banning.
>>
>> Because Mitch says so. Even though he's a member and could have blocked for
>> more discussion.
>>
>> We treat abusive people with kid gloves, and even when we manage to get
>> something passed consensus and say, "Yes, this person should be banned",
>> Mitch still wants to have a do-over.
>>
>> Mitch, do you respect consensus? Or only when it agrees with you?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Praveen Sinha <dmhomee at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I love you Naomi!!!!  Community meeting is a GREAT idea :)  I don't know
>>> if I can be there tonight, but I'll try my best.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I will be there.  I also feel this is an extremely important
>>>> discussion, and goes much deeper than simply the use of a ban.
>>>>
>>>> I have a solution in mind to avoid these situations, something I
>>>> brought up a few meetings ago: a "community" meeting.
>>>>
>>>> Misunderstandings shouldn't be allowed to scale to the level of
>>>> "drama".  In our current "system", we only have two modes: the general
>>>> meeting and noisebridge-discuss.  The former is simply an
>>>> inappropriate venue for addressing interpersonal issues, and the
>>>> latter... well.
>>>>
>>>> Now that I see to what ridiculous level the Noisebridge version of
>>>> justice can be taken in response to interpersonal issues that should
>>>> never have escalated, it's time we consider strongly the idea of
>>>> having a Community meeting in addition to the NB general meeting.
>>>>
>>>> --Naomi
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Mitch Altman <maltman23 at hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Unfortunately I won't be able to be at tonight's meeting.  But I want
>>>> > to
>>>> > encourage discussion of "Banning".
>>>> >
>>>> > It is important to get rid of people who melt use, rather contribute to
>>>> > the
>>>> > culture of Noisebridge and is mission and vision.  It is also important
>>>> > to
>>>> > ban people who are disruptive, make many people uncomfortable, or are
>>>> > violent or hateful.
>>>> >
>>>> > It is also important to not use banning as a means of getting rid of
>>>> > someone
>>>> > because you don't like them, or because you have a misunderstanding or
>>>> > argument.
>>>> >
>>>> > Banning is a drastic measure, and (unless for violent or hateful or
>>>> > illegal
>>>> > behavior) should only be done when other means have been exhausted.
>>>> >
>>>> > These concepts need to be discussed and explored.
>>>> >
>>>> > A specific case came to my attention recently.  Lee Sony was apparently
>>>> > banned without him being allowed to present his position.  He will be
>>>> > at
>>>> > tonight's meeting.  I hope people will listen and respond.  I feel this
>>>> > is
>>>> > important.
>>>> >
>>>> > Best,
>>>> > Mitch.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > 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
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
> -- 
> Naomi Theora Most
> naomi at nthmost.com
> +1-415-728-7490
> skype: nthmost
> http://twitter.com/nthmost
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140225/e020a2a4/attachment.html>