[Noisebridge-discuss] "Banning" discussion tonight

[Charles Tang]

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 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://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20140225/e3a163b4/attachment-0003.html>