[Noisebridge-discuss] catching up with "what's wrong with discussing things at the Tuesday meeting"

spinach williams spinach.williams at gmail.com
Thu Mar 27 05:19:09 UTC 2014

On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 10:12:36 PM Al Sweigart wrote:
> That's my point though: while in theory consensus is supposed to be more
> inclusive, over the last five years it's more often been a way for one or
> two people to use blocking as a nuclear option. This protects abusive
> people and excludes others who feel unsafe at the space. (See also: the
> overwhelming number of people joining Double Union who wouldn't touch
> Noisebridge with a ten foot pole)
> We've been hearing the "ah, but it's not the TRUE way of consensus" for
> literally years. Maybe the reason we haven't found this utopian version of
> consensus is because it doesn't exist.
documentation's been linked and repeatedly ignored. that's your fault if 
you've not yet familiarized yourself with the process and its tenets, after 
all these years.

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list