[Noisebridge-discuss] Tom refusing to solve problems

Jake jake at spaz.org
Fri Mar 14 22:09:53 UTC 2014

read it again.  I did that for months, Tom blocked my proposal without 
explanation and effectively refused to discuss his block.

does that answer your question?


On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Adrian Chadd wrote:

> Wait, what's stopping you from coming to a Tuesday night meeting,
> gathering support and trying to push it forward?
> -a
> On 14 March 2014 13:28, Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:
>> An open letter to Tom Lowenthal, actually intended for the discuss list:
>> I replied to the attached email and got nothing in response.  This is after
>> REPEATED attempts to get you to talk about your objections and seek a common
>> ground, talk about friendly amendments, or any progress at all.
>> I accuse you of acting in bad faith in the consensus process, which is even
>> worse because you're "Secretary of Noisebridge".
>> It also reflects poorly on noisebridge in general that people were not more
>> demanding of an explanation from you when you blocked my proposal, with no
>> willingness for discussion, despite the fact that the proposal sought things
>> that seemed to be universally needed as improvements.
>> For reference, here is the original proposal MADE IN NOVEMBER!!!
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2013-November/040268.html
>> mentioned in this thread as well:
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2013-December/041463.html
>> It is now April.  Tom, you effectively short-circuited my efforts to improve
>> noisebridge and come to meetings, single-handedly.  I can understand why Lee
>> Sonko went crazy.  You are a tyrant!  You abuse your powers without shame!
>> It was also disturbing to see you using your Operator powers to kickban
>> people in IRC for offending you, and caring not at all when the entire
>> channel erupted in protest of your unwelcome "enforcement" actions.
>> The discuss list has been buzzing with activity to address concerns about
>> making noisebridge a better place.  I was working hard toward those goals
>> until you blocked with no explanation.  What the fuck is your motivation?
>> This post may seem directed toward Tom, but i have no reason to expect a
>> productive response.  Instead I ask that anyone reading this who wants to
>> improve noisebridge ask themselves and each other, what do we do when
>> someone unilaterally obstructs progress in this way?
>> I will point out that despite specifically asking for concerns or
>> constructive criticism to my proposal each time I posted it to the list, NO
>> ONE emailed me with objections or concerns, INCLUDING TOM.
>> -jake
>> On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, Tom Lowenthal wrote:
>>> Hi Jake,
>>> I disagree with your proposal as written, but I'm sure that there's
>>> middle ground to be found. I don't think that this is going to be a
>>> productive email conversation. It'd be much better in person. A
>>> Tuesday meeting probably isn't the easiest or best time. How about
>>> getting together another time to try and hash things out?
>>> -Tom
>>> On 22 December 2013 20:04, Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:
>>>> tom,
>>>> i feel a bit frustrated by the lack of progress made on the issue of
>>>> noisebridge access policy since your blocking.
>>>> i spelled out my proposal very clearly and showed up to discuss it, after
>>>> soliciting commentary on the list for a number of weeks.
>>>> i am not satisfied with the current state of noisebridge access policy.
>>>> I
>>>> am open to input from you on moving forward but so far i haven't heard
>>>> anything from you but a simple block.
>>>> please engage with me and describe what about my proposal is acceptable
>>>> to
>>>> you and what is not acceptable, so that we can make as much progress as
>>>> possible.  I believe that if you are acting in good faith that you will
>>>> help
>>>> to facilitate progress and not just inhibit.
>>>> -jake
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list