[Noisebridge-discuss] Sleepers

Al Sweigart asweigart at gmail.com
Wed Jan 29 01:31:41 UTC 2014


Jeffrey, how long did the trial period end up lasting?

Also, I think that while the members-only hours would help cut down on the
sleeping problem, I don't think it would solve it. I still think a
no-sleeping-between-hours-X-and-Y would be a good idea, along with
prescribing a ban/suspension from the space for repeat offenders.

But again, I feel like consensus will prevent this or any other compromise
from happening.


On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Jeffrey Carl Faden <jeffreyatw at gmail.com>wrote:

> I hope we're all remembering that we tried closing the space a few months
> ago, and some people complained and cut the trial period short, resulting
> in the whole "associate member" business instead.
>
> Is there anything different about what's being suggested now?
>
> Jeffrey
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Madelynn Martiniere <
> mmartiniere at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 I find this idea most excellent.
>>
>>
>> On Jan 28, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> A few years ago I suggested making the space "members only" after
>> midnight to reduce the number of people using Noisebridge as a crashpad. I
>> think that's a good idea.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Dean Mao <dean.mao at hackerdojo.com>wrote:
>>
>>> We did some things at the Hacker Dojo that reduced the number of
>>> sleepers significantly.  There's still 2 homeless that are sleeping at the
>>> Dojo but it's less than before.  We disabled our free wifi at night and we
>>> made it a rule that only members can be present after 10pm.  It wasn't
>>> strictly enforced or anything, but it still reduced the number of
>>> transients significantly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Ronald Cotoni <setient at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Maybe we should have a member party at night when we find some sleepers
>>>> and confront them then and there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Gregory Dillon <
>>>> gregorydillon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If you offered a proposal that banned shooting heroin in the bathroom,
>>>>>  it *could* pass.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This is precisely the policy gridlock that consensus puts Noisebridge
>>>>>> in: there's no way consensus can be reached to say "sleeping is banned" or
>>>>>> "sleeping is allowed". As I've said before, we've had incidents of people
>>>>>> shooting heroin in the bathroom, but we don't have a policy that says you
>>>>>> can't shoot heroin in the bathroom. As such, the issue never gets resolved
>>>>>> and conflict continues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Curtis, sleepers who are kicked out are never confronted about it at
>>>>>> a meeting. They just come back to Noisebridge the next night to sleep.
>>>>>> Perhaps we should have these individual confrontations at meetings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Al
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Gregory Dillon <
>>>>>> gregorydillon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @Hannah   Thank you, for your insight into where the community
>>>>>>> stands.  polarized without a "bridge".  I will  withdraw the proposal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But still, correct me if I'm wrong, there is also  no consensed
>>>>>>> policy against sleeping either   The idea was to begin defining a policy
>>>>>>> that had safeguards from day one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Hannah Grimm <dharlette at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm very much opposed to your proposal as it's currently written;
>>>>>>>> it reads as if you're saying that there should be alternatives to banning
>>>>>>>> people for sleeping, but as we don't currently have a policy of
>>>>>>>> auto-banning people for sleeping a specific policy of offering alternatives
>>>>>>>> is unnecessary and only serves to be confusing and take up meeting time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Gregory Dillon <
>>>>>>>> gregorydillon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi List,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Al, let me think about your advice.  I agree that my proposal is
>>>>>>>>> accurately described as vague.   But that it is purposeful vague because
>>>>>>>>> that reflects reality.   In life, there are some concepts that are vague
>>>>>>>>> but still express broad principles.  The community view on sleeping at
>>>>>>>>> Noisebridge is currently vague but I think there are some broad principles
>>>>>>>>> of agreement..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have tried to articulate what I believe is consensable:  that
>>>>>>>>> many agree sleeping at Noisebride is taking up too much energy at meetings,
>>>>>>>>> that sleeping at Noisebridge is harming the space, but that gray areas
>>>>>>>>> exist, that some "sanctioning" event should be triggered by sleeping at
>>>>>>>>> Noisebridge, but the actual "sanction" should depend on the circumstances.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My consensus proposal says that there should be some "sanction"
>>>>>>>>> for sleeping at Noisebridge, but that they should be effected only after
>>>>>>>>> considering the full circumstance, and therefore the range of "sanctions"
>>>>>>>>> should be broad.    Maybe the sanction is only a verbal warning that people
>>>>>>>>> are going to be watching if your are sleeping too often.  Or on the other
>>>>>>>>> end, it looks like your are not hacking but are are setting up residency
>>>>>>>>> there, our lease doesn't allow that and that residency threatens the
>>>>>>>>> existence of Noisebridge, so a strict sanction is appropriate.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Al, I'll consider your advice,  but I would not want  a specific
>>>>>>>>> actionable proposal that would  act as a "sentencing guidelines" based on
>>>>>>>>> 30 different sleeping scenarios.  I want to trust the wisdom of the group
>>>>>>>>> to implement an answer based on the broad principles that sleeping should
>>>>>>>>> have some response from the community, but the sanctions could vary widely.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hey Greg, the consensus proposal seems really vague: I'm not sure
>>>>>>>>>> what the actual policy or guidelines it proposes are. Do you want to take
>>>>>>>>>> that off the consensus item list and instead have it as a discussion item
>>>>>>>>>> at the meeting? The consensus proposals are really for actionable and
>>>>>>>>>> clearly-worded policy, but it looks more like you'd like to have a
>>>>>>>>>> conversation on it to determine what the policy should be.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Gregory Dillon <
>>>>>>>>>> gregorydillon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Monad,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have a consensus proposal<https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Current_Consensus_Items>up for consideration that asks for circumspection and "slack" for people
>>>>>>>>>>> found sleeping when it is due.   It is a purposefully a soft measure that I
>>>>>>>>>>> hope can get support from all ends of the spectrum on this issue.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Many members of the community will feel that my proposal does
>>>>>>>>>>> not go far enough to be a  solution on sleeping at Noisebridge, and there
>>>>>>>>>>> may be  laissez fairests who favor unrestrained sleep locations.   But I
>>>>>>>>>>> think that is its strength.   A workable compromise.    I ask you to
>>>>>>>>>>> consider it as a way to address the sleeping issue, while being caring and
>>>>>>>>>>> considerate that people are finding it hard to find a place to lay their
>>>>>>>>>>> head down to sleep.
>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Paul Monad <immonad at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The only tool we have at the moment is:  personally wake them,
>>>>>>>>>>>> ask if they are sponsored then ... , or asking them to leave and come to
>>>>>>>>>>>> the next meeting.   Jake pointed out certain individuals should be given
>>>>>>>>>>>> slack for a short time.  Circumspection and discretion is mandatory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> They invariably say they were asleep for a very short time.  If
>>>>>>>>>>>> left alone, is soon back asleep.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As many as possible should speak directly with the problem
>>>>>>>>>>>> individuals because this is a community of doers.  It shouldn't be the
>>>>>>>>>>>> efforts of the few. Perception is important.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone who wants to participate but have transportation
>>>>>>>>>>>> problems please contact me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>>>>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ronald Cotoni
>>>> Systems Engineer
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dean Mao
>>> dean.mao at hackerdojo.com
>>> Come visit us, we love new people!
>>> www.hackerdojo.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20140128/c9156476/attachment.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list