[Noisebridge-discuss] why would hackers come to noisebridge?

Fri Mar 14 01:20:36 UTC 2014

On Thursday, March 13, 2014 16:17:24 Dean Mao wrote:
> The Hacker Dojo is arguably younger than noisebridge and probably less
> "membership-oriented" compared to noisebridge, but our membership has
> skyrocketed to the point where it's hard to find an empty chair during
> normal business hours.  We still have the occasional sleeper at night, but
> because we are so fast at banning people, that problem usually doesn't
> persist.  When we banned patrick keyes, it only required a meeting of 3-4
> people and it was a done deal.  You guys should definitely reconsider how
> you ban people.  We didn't have to ask all of our directors for ban
> approval to make it happen.

Do you have some documentation of that protocol? I'm curious to see how that 
works.

> 
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hep, your description of Noisebridge is spot on.
> > 
> > Here's the difference that I think an active board can make: Noisebridge
> > has taken to the extreme a philosophy that we shouldn't ban people or that
> > we should give bad behavior effectively unlimited second chances. (The
> > first person we banned was Patrick Keyes for sexually harassing multiple
> > women, and even then it was pulling teeth to get him banned and not just
> > suspended.) Consensus is what affords this: a tiny minority can block,
> > delay, and in general abuse process to wear out their opponents.
> > 
> > A board does not have to endlessly talk about policy and makes decisions
> > by majority vote: a board can set policy and *gasp* make decisions. This
> > includes suspending and banning people for bad behavior.
> > 
> > (Obligatory footnote about abuse of power, "define bad behavior", tyranny
> > of the majority, etc.)
> > 
> > Consensus is what holds Noisebridge hostage: a 1% can have more power just
> > because they have more volume, and meanwhile we can't get many new members
> > because we are so afraid of extending this power to new people.
> > 
> > -Al
> > 
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Ronald Cotoni <setient at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I am with what hep said.  I am also with Naomi.  This is a hackerspace.
> >> 
> >>  Lets hack the system and figure out how to solve problems.  I am also
> >>  with
> >> 
> >> Al that I feel sad that UU had to even exist because noisebridge was not
> >> safe enough or good enough.  I also understand that some people just like
> >> working with other females and don't even want to bother at this stage of
> >> their lives.  I just feel it was mostly a response to Noisebridge not
> >> being
> >> safe and not the latter.
> >> 
> >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I am openly biased towards anarchism and lack of top-down control.
> >>> But we can't keep shouting down the idea of "oversight" to address
> >>> problems that Noisebridge has had for YEEAAARRRSSS when we've
> >>> certainly given the Noisebridge traditional methods that long to fix
> >>> things.
> >>> 
> >>> For the record, I don't agree with the idea of direct
> >>> people-management or in changing the way we arrive at decisions at
> >>> Noisebridge.  My idea of a positive change would be to have the board
> >>> managing facilities and facilitating participation -- e.g. forming
> >>> working groups.  I believe these improvements will make a lot of the
> >>> other crap die down naturally.
> >>> 
> >>> And as it turns out, that's what we're going to do first.
> >>> 
> >>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:46 AM, hep <dis at gruntle.org> wrote:
> >>> > And that would be different from what noisebridge has had in the last
> >>> 
> >>> 5yr
> >>> 
> >>> > how? as it stands, many women do not feel safe at noisebridge because
> >>> 
> >>> of
> >>> 
> >>> > sexual assault and the past somewhat failure to deal with it in a
> >>> 
> >>> manner
> >>> 
> >>> > where women felt safe and listened to at nb. many valuable
> >>> > contributing
> >>> > people have left nb because of its failure to address major
> >>> 
> >>> infrastructure
> >>> 
> >>> > problems. if having a more active board helps to stop sexual abuse and
> >>> 
> >>> makes
> >>> 
> >>> > the culture more welcoming to those who would positively contribute,
> >>> 
> >>> then i
> >>> 
> >>> > am 100% down with active management. i would like noisebridge to be
> >>> > somewhere i can bring friends to interest them in hacking, bring my
> >>> > childrens' school championship robotics team to inspire them to the
> >>> 
> >>> next
> >>> 
> >>> > victory, not a place where i am fearful to go on my own because there
> >>> 
> >>> are no
> >>> 
> >>> > protections or infrastructure to ensure basic safety.
> >>> > 
> >>> > -hep
> >>> > 
> >>> > 
> >>> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Torrie Fischer <
> >>> 
> >>> tdfischer at hackerbots.net>
> >>> 
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >> I think it is important to note that in the context of a hackerspace,
> >>> >> there is
> >>> >> a difference between managing the infrastructure and managing the
> >>> 
> >>> people
> >>> 
> >>> >> who
> >>> >> hack on the infrastructure.
> >>> >> 
> >>> >> From experience, just saying "active management" easily leads to bad
> >>> 
> >>> times
> >>> 
> >>> >> and, uh, rather verbose mailing list threads.
> >>> > 
> >>> > --
> >>> > hep
> >>> > hepic photography || www.hepic.net
> >>> > 
> >>> >     dis at gruntle.org || 415 867 9472
> >>> > 
> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> >>> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> >>> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >>> 
> >>> --
> >>> Naomi Theora Most
> >>> naomi at nthmost.com
> >>> +1-415-728-7490
> >>> 
> >>> skype: nthmost
> >>> 
> >>> http://twitter.com/nthmost
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20140313/d4d626d1/attachment-0003.sig>