[Noisebridge-discuss] "Banning" discussion tonight

[Ronald Cotoni]

Then this is pretty clear that it is harassment.   Right?   What more
information do we need?
On Feb 25, 2014 6:32 PM, "Charles Tang" <cjtang1 at asu.edu> wrote:

> I don't think mediation between Tom and Lee is a good idea.
>
> I mean Lee seems to want Toms attention for some reason.
> --
> Sent from Mailbox <https://www.dropbox.com/mailbox> for iPhone
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Ronald Cotoni <setient at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Can you help lee with getting a consensus item on the docket or perhaps
>> mediation?
>> On Feb 25, 2014 6:23 PM, "Naomi Gmail" <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  I could have blocked as well, but thought MCT had it covered.
>>>
>>> Honestly I just didn't think the proposal would go through. I see it as
>>> a failure of community and an abuse of bureaucracy that it did go through.
>>> So I am coming tonight to learn more.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Feb 25, 2014, at 6:18 PM, Lee Sonko <lee at lee.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>  MCT agreed to proxy-block for me several weeks ago. He was at the
>>> meeting 2 weeks ago when the matter was expected to be discussed, however
>>> it wasn't brought up. Last week MCT wasn't at the meeting so I had no
>>> representation.
>>>
>>> I work Tuesday evenings so am generally unable to attend meetings but I
>>> found a substitute tonight.
>>>
>>> I hope we can all discuss this matter together.
>>>
>>> Lee
>>> On Feb 25, 2014 6:07 PM, "Ronald Cotoni" <setient at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lee was aware and Lee chose for a long time to not come to meetings or
>>>> get someone else to proxy block.  I suggest you get a deeper understanding
>>>> of how consensus works and why it is the way it is.   It was to give him
>>>> time, which he ignored sadly and has to deal with the consequences now.
>>>> On Feb 25, 2014 6:00 PM, "Charles Tang" <cjtang1 at asu.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The second person who answers by come to a meeting.
>>>>>
>>>>> These answers are fluid, which is the reason why Johnny asked for
>>>>> clarification on GitHub.
>>>>>
>>>>> We need a better understanding and conceptualizer for banning.
>>>>>
>>>>> I made my case with Lee. It seems to me he was just being annoying to
>>>>> Tom. Now, others do annoying things to me all the time, but I don't exclude.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem here is a failure to communicate, to ask, to
>>>>> "participate", to educate and to help.
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed, the community is fractured. Indeed, people can be annoying
>>>>> Indeed, people can do bad things.
>>>>>
>>>>> But, goodness is fragile. Moreover, exclusion is not the answer for
>>>>> our problems. Inquisitions to rid ourselves of alternatives forecloses
>>>>> opportunity for us all.
>>>>>
>>>>> And movements fail. . . .
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sent from Mailbox <https://www.dropbox.com/mailbox> for iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Ronald Cotoni <setient at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Come to a meeting.  Read the bylaws and look at the wiki.  These
>>>>>> questions can be answered by those things
>>>>>> On Feb 25, 2014 5:47 PM, "Charles Tang" <cjtang1 at asu.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is active member defined be the label "member" or is it define by
>>>>>>> those who are "active."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or is there really a mythical "active member"
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Sent from Mailbox <https://www.dropbox.com/mailbox> for iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Adrian Chadd <
>>>>>>> adrian.chadd at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 25 February 2014 17:42, Darius Garza <313kid at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> > "A ban from the Noisebridge space may be a useful social
>>>>>>>> punishment for a
>>>>>>>> > social crime"
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Noisebridge is a lot of things, but it certainly isn't up to
>>>>>>>> anyone to use
>>>>>>>> > it as a "social punishment" tool.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ... noisebridge is apparently whatever the active membership decide
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> is. I thought that was the point.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -a
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20140225/ae0af01d/attachment.html>