[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge House Rules

Gregory Dillon gregorydillon at gmail.com
Wed Mar 19 18:45:24 UTC 2014


Tthe meeting notes say
 Kevin is willing to accept prohibiting sleeping at Noisebridge,
- Will that be part of your proposal?




On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kevin <bfb at riseup.net> wrote:

> On March 19, 2014 11:07:24 AM PDT, Jessica Ross <jessica.r.ross at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Why can't you guys rebut this with "It's against the terms of the
> > lease and
> > could get us evicted"?
> >
> > It's BS that you're even still debating this!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Kevin is against banning sleeping at the space because he and his
> > friends
> > > like to sleep at the space. He helped build the "hacker stacker"
> > bunk beds
> > > that were in the space which, unsurprisingly, were used for more
> > than just
> > > short naps in the space.
> > >
> > > Kevin will single-handedly block any measure to ban sleeping without
> > > compromise, because consensus lets him do this. He is against any
> > actual
> > > punitive consequences because he knows that even if people are woken
> > up and
> > > told not to sleep at the space, they can just do so again the next
> > night
> > > (or just later that same morning).
> > >
> > > Hey, if the majority of Noisebridge members said they were fine with
> > > people sleeping at the space, I would back down on my stance.
> > Whereas Kevin
> > > will barge in on a meeting an hour late and then get his way.
> > >
> > > The thing that gets me is that he doesn't even have to publicly
> > defend his
> > > unpopular view in order to get his way. (Note that he didn't mention
> > > sleeping at all in his email on this thread, even though that's the
> > > elephant in the room.) All he has to do is keep saying "there needs
> > to more
> > > discussion" week after week until the issue fades into the
> > background once
> > > more.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Kevin Schiesser <bfb at riseup.net>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Brandon Edens:
> > >> > Hi all,
> > >> >
> > >> > The consensus of Noisebridge is that we have some house rules.
> > You can
> > >> read
> > >> > about them here...
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/noisebridge/bureaucracy/blob/master/rules/house-rules.md
> > >> >
> > >> > Enjoy!
> > >> > Brandon
> > >> >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > >> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > >> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> I barged into the open meeting an hour late tonight and rejected
> > the
> > >> civility of passing this proposal, given I had aired unaddressed
> > >> concerns. Discussion on the proposal was reopened, hence
> > Noisebridge has
> > >> not come to consensus on 'house rules'.
> > >>
> > >> I will be preparing an alternative draft. If anyone wants to
> > >> collaborate, contact me via email or let's work though github.
> > >>
> > >> Generally, I favor 'community agreements'. I oppose punitive
> > measures,
> > >> and do not believe punitive measure will positively transform
> > Noisebridge.
> > >>
> > >> If agreements are to be codified, we should start with the most
> > >> abundantly clear agreements... We agree not to attempt to repair
> > the
> > >> elevator, not to go on the roof (unless maintenancing an antenna),
> > not
> > >> to go in the basement, not to go on the fire escape, not to live at
> > >> Noisebridge. We also agree that projects kept on the hacker shelves
> > in
> > >> the SW corner of the space or kept in personal lockers belong to
> > >> participants in the community and are not for general purpose
> > hacking.
> > >> <Add your own agreement>.
> > >>
> > >> -Kevin
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> 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
>
> I'm very open to collaborating on a revised Draft of this document.
>  Please read the meeting notes or try to understand what I wrote before
> jumping in with critique. Polarization, accusation, and hyperbole are not
> effective.
>
> For context...
>
> At every prior meeting I said that I had concerns with the house rules
> proposal. Often, the agenda was too full of bannings to have substantive
> discussion of my concerns. I was shocked to arrive late and hear consensus
> was reached without having had opportunity for discussion. The group agreed
> I was previously misunderstood, the proposal is not urgent, and that more
> discussion is needed.
>
> Hence more discussion and reaching out to the community.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>



-- 
Let's stay in touch.  Greg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20140319/ae17a3ac/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list