[Noisebridge-discuss] anti-anonymity proposal take 2

[Al Sweigart]

Yes, members can request a list of members from the secretary.

Section 14.1. Members' Right to Inspect
https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/bylaws#14.1._Members.27_Right_to_Inspect


On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Gregory Dillon <gregorydillon at gmail.com>wrote:

> Thinking off the top of my head, but what about providing a members list
> but including an anonymizing  (word?) function similar to what craigslist
> uses to respond to an advertisement.   (and like on craigslist members
> could opt in / opt out of the anonymous part)
>
>  That way all the members could be reached - but the members would have a
> way to filter their email, and are given more privacy from possible weird
> contacts .
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Ronald Cotoni <setient at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The reasoning for making it public was as kevin says.  Basically more
>> transparency and it is good for members to know who other members are.   As
>> far as Rubin saying it is a doocratic thing, this is a pretty big impact
>> and could be hurtful/helpful to many members.  This is why we are
>> discussing it.  We would like to make it a policy going forward to to share
>> this list with a piece of contact info and a name they choose to go by.
>> It allows one member to contact another member.  One could doocratically do
>> this.  They could ask the Secretary, Tom, for this information and publish
>> it themselves.  Possibly in an excellent way and possibly not.  If it goes
>> through consensus, it is more formal and written down as opposed to verbal
>> tradition that can be done over and over again in the same way.   With
>> doocracy there is no real guarantee that it will be done the same in the
>> future or whatever.
>>
>> There are pro's and cons to each side.  I hope this explains some of the
>> reasoning.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Gregory Dillon <gregorydillon at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately, I also missed the meeting, so Ron and all please excuse
>>> me if I missed some part of the reasoning.
>>>
>>>
>>> I believe every Non-profit including Noisebridge is strengthened when it
>>> brings in quality people who can contribute to the organization, especially
>>> when those people take leadership position.   Many people are against
>>> having their addresses and contact information broadly published and
>>> indexed by Google, and they are in > % than avg at NB.   So  a requirement
>>> that  their address and contact information be published would be a
>>> disincentive to full participation, and may keep good people from being
>>> part of Noisebridge.
>>>
>>> But there is an middle ground  on privacy and openness of membership
>>> that can be looked at.  The state law model represents the wisdom of the
>>> usage of thousands of nonprofit corporation, and it aims for a middle
>>> ground.   I 'd prefer that membership lists not be Google searchable, but
>>> that  when a consensus member want a list of members for a reason
>>> consistent with being a consensus member, that they are provided that list.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Ronald Cotoni <setient at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rubin, I would suggest reading the meeting notes from the past few
>>>> weeks.  There was some discussion about this specific case.  If
>>>> necessarily, I will do a write up in a bit as to why.  Anything can be
>>>> doocratic but it isn't necessarily the most excellent way of doing things.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Ronald Cotoni <setient at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't think you are quite understanding it.  Yes this can be
>>>>> doocracitcally done by the secretary but the secretary thought it might be
>>>>> a nice idea to pass it by the community and reach out to it before doing
>>>>> so.  You know to make sure it was excellent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom, would you mind chiming in here and explaining the reasoning (we
>>>>> did this at the meeting a bunch but rubin no longer attends them and hasn't
>>>>> in quite some time).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Rubin Abdi <rubin at starset.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Eyes up here buddy...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://0.starset.net/screenies/20140312160311-Selection.png
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Rubin
>>>>>> rubin at starset.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Ronald Cotoni
>>>>> Systems Engineer
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ronald Cotoni
>>>> Systems Engineer
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ronald Cotoni
>> Systems Engineer
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140313/30e42785/attachment-0001.html>