[Noisebridge-discuss] [Drama] Fwd: [Noisebridge-announce] Important Noisebridge Procedural Changes

[Will Sargent]

What Jessica said, in spades.

Noisebridge not only has people sleeping in the space on a regular basis,
it has people being offered meth in the space.

https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2014-March/043062.html

What I find really damning is not even that someone was offered meth in the
space.  It's the reaction that Monad had from the people in the space.
 No-one helped him.  Only one person even offered to identify him, and one
guy expressed the opinion that no-one should *ever* be banned.

If this is normal, tolerated behavior in the space now, then yes: shit is
on fire.

Will.

On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Jessica Ross <jessica.r.ross at gmail.com>wrote:

> I hate to say it, but, from here, it looks like you guys are on fire.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:03 AM, rachel lyra hospodar <
> rachelyra at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would argue that a very fundamental part of Noisebridge charter is to
>> in fact listen to and attempt to incorporate rather than override a
>> dissenting opinion.
>>
>> There is always time to mull things over, unless something is on fire.
>>
>> Also, I would like to note the difference between formally and formerly
>> and humbly submit a pull request to the whole announcement due to whiplash
>> and confusion. What the fuck kind of members are we talking about, formal
>> ones? If I wear a tuxedo on the sixth Tuesday of a given month do I get a
>> say in how Noisebridge works?  Ah yes, do-ocratic voting. I hereby decree a
>> new class of Noisebridge members, the formal kind. Please discuss.
>>
>> R.
>> On Mar 25, 2014 8:48 PM, "Al Sweigart" <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Why did you reply to this thread if you didn't want to talk about this
>>> publicly? You can't just say "Disregard" and expect that no one else will
>>> comment on this commandment.
>>>
>>>  I told Tom that I agreed with the proposal, so it's 4 out of 5.
>>>
>>> Your humble opinion aside, decisions do not require a unanimous vote of
>>> the board. The bylaws of Noisebridge don't say it does and have never said
>>> that. "Naomi does not agree" is not "the board does not agree".
>>>
>>> -Al
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh goody, let's make this public.
>>>>
>>>> Al, the issues in question were proposed 7 hours ago, during which
>>>> time I was at work. Then I went to yoga.  Then I found when I decided
>>>> to check my email that about 10 different issues were all lumped
>>>> together in a single "proposal" and that 2 people had voted "+1" on
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> 2 + the person who proposed the changes = 3.  3 out of 5 is a positive
>>>> vote.
>>>>
>>>> These changes were then implemented *immediately*.
>>>>
>>>> IMHO, the board did not "agree", because "agreement" cannot occur in a
>>>> situation where discussion did not take place.
>>>>
>>>> I have already put in a proposal within the board that proposals can't
>>>> be voted upon and carried out until one full week has passed.  I can't
>>>> believe I had to do that, but apparently some people think that
>>>> "agreement" can be reached without discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Membership: discuss.
>>>>
>>>> --Naomi
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Jessica R. Ross
> jessica.r.ross at gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140326/db0a76a3/attachment.html>