Current Consensus Items

From Noisebridge
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Updated)
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:
 
! Wording
 
! Wording
 
! Author of this Record
 
! Author of this Record
 
|-
 
| 2014-02-11
 
| [[User:Qbit|Qbit]]
 
| Request to amend ballot
 
| Request to append [[User:Qbit|Qbit]] to the BoD election ballot. I made the deadline of the 4th, but I didn't have computer access prior to the meeting, so was unable to add my name before consensus was reached on the list of nominees. I messaged ahead to [[User:N0_Hat|N0_Hat]] before the meeting started to let him know I was on the way and requested he inform [[User:BfB|BfB]], Chair of the election committee.
 
 
Background: I began my scientific career at [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X_HDSQXMI0 Starlab], a multidisciplinary "Deep Future" research institute which focused on advanced research that offers significant long-term potential impact for humanity. Leading 500 upcoming diplomats as Chairman for the UNISCA First Committee on Disarmament and International Security. Currently leading 160 PhD-level scientists, researchers and engineers as Director of the Board and Chief Science Officer for the [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0H9qb9GHxM world's first commercial astronaut corps].
 
| [[User:Qbit|Qbit]]
 
  
 
|-
 
|-
Line 25: Line 16:
 
| The moderator of the weekly meeting should ask if people think that the prior weeks meeting notes are accurate and sufficient. (I invite amendments to the language - the purpose is to avoid confusion and shadow the procedure in formal meetings to approve the prior meetings minutes)
 
| The moderator of the weekly meeting should ask if people think that the prior weeks meeting notes are accurate and sufficient. (I invite amendments to the language - the purpose is to avoid confusion and shadow the procedure in formal meetings to approve the prior meetings minutes)
 
| [[User:Gregorydillon|Greg]]
 
| [[User:Gregorydillon|Greg]]
 
 
 
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2014-02-09
 
| 2014-02-09
Line 34: Line 22:
 
| Pidgeon is unwelcome at Noisebridge. They are prohibited from entering the space or participating in the community.  
 
| Pidgeon is unwelcome at Noisebridge. They are prohibited from entering the space or participating in the community.  
 
| [[User:MadCap|Robin]]
 
| [[User:MadCap|Robin]]
 
 
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2014-01-21 (discussed? not in meeting notes)
 
| 2014-01-21 (discussed? not in meeting notes)
Line 41: Line 27:
 
| Ban Lee Sonko
 
| Ban Lee Sonko
 
| Lee Sonko is unwelcome at Noisebridge. He is prohibited from entering the space or participating in the community.  
 
| Lee Sonko is unwelcome at Noisebridge. He is prohibited from entering the space or participating in the community.  
| [[User:Flamsmark|Tom]]
 
|-
 
| 2014-01-21 (discussed? not in meeting notes)
 
| [[User:Flamsmark|Tom]]
 
| Ban E. Clair Bandersnatch
 
| E. Clair Bandersnatch is unwelcome at Noisebridge. She is prohibited from entering the space or participating in the community.
 
| [[User:Flamsmark|Tom]]
 
|-
 
| 2014-01-21
 
| [[User:Flamsmark|Tom]]
 
| Git repo for policy
 
| The canonical location for Noisebridge policies and processes shall be a git repository. The canonical process to modify these policies and processes shall be the merging of a proposed changed version. The desicion to merge a patch shall be made by Noisebridge's consensus process. The most recent version of all such policies and procedures shall also be posted at an appropriate page on the Noisebridge wiki. It shall be the responsibility of the Secretary to operate and maintain this system.
 
 
| [[User:Flamsmark|Tom]]
 
| [[User:Flamsmark|Tom]]
 
|-
 
|-
Line 68: Line 42:
 
| 2014-1-8
 
| 2014-1-8
 
| [[User:AlSweigart|Al]]
 
| [[User:AlSweigart|Al]]
| Ban Dan
+
| ''In mediation'' Ban Dan
 
| Mediation complete. Mediators: Praveen, Madelynn.  
 
| Mediation complete. Mediators: Praveen, Madelynn.  
  
Line 76: Line 50:
 
|2013-12-10
 
|2013-12-10
 
|[[User:Bfb|Kevin]]
 
|[[User:Bfb|Kevin]]
| Expiration period for associate member policy
+
| ''Tabled until details are elaborated'' Expiration period for associate member policy
|Noisebridge should attach an expiration period of 90 days, beginning October 29, 2013, to the consensus decision [[Meeting_Notes_2013_10_29#Proposal_to_create_an_Associate_Member_role_and_limit_access_to_Noisebridge_24.2F7_to_Member.2C_Associate_Member_and_thoes_hosted_by_M_and_AM|to create an Associate Member role]]. All subsequent mutations of the original consensus should be brought for a second consensus, beginning February 4, 2014. If no consensus can be reached, Noisebridge will revert to being open to the public all day, every day.
+
|Noisebridge should attach an expiration period of 90 days to the consensus decision [[Meeting_Notes_2013_10_29#Proposal_to_create_an_Associate_Member_role_and_limit_access_to_Noisebridge_24.2F7_to_Member.2C_Associate_Member_and_thoes_hosted_by_M_and_AM|to create new Member role]]. All subsequent mutations of the original consensus should be brought for a second consensus. If no consensus can be reached, Noisebridge will revert to being open to the public.
 
|[[User:Bfb|Kevin]]
 
|[[User:Bfb|Kevin]]
|-
 
| 2013-12-10
 
| [[User:flamsmark|Tom Lowenthal]]
 
| Membership renaming
 
| Renaming the category “Noisebridge Members” to the “Noisebridge Council”, and renaming the category “Associate Members” to “Noisebridge Members”. This change extends not only to our operations, but also to our bylaws, so that the effect is only a change of name but does not change the rights or privileges of any person or category of people.
 
| [[User:flamsmark|Tom Lowenthal]]
 
|-
 
| 2014-01-21
 
| [[User:flamsmark|Tom]]
 
| No changes to consensus proposals
 
| Proposals shall only be elegible to reach consensus in a weekly meeting in the exact form that they were agreed at a previous weekly meeting. Items shall not be elegible for consensus unless they were recorded on the Current Consensus Items page on the Noisebridge wiki before 24 hours have passed after the end of the weekly meeting in which they were proposed. If a proposal is modified at a weekly meeting, it shall not be elegible for consensus at that meeting.
 
| [[User:flamsmark|Tom]]
 
|-
 
|[[Meeting_Notes_2013_11_19|2013-11-19]]
 
|[[User:Jerkey|Jake]]
 
| Members-only wording change
 
|Jake proposes a change to the previous consensus agreement regarding access to Noisebridge. (originally posted 2013/11/4 to discuss)
 
 
Replace:
 
<blockquote>Noisebridge's space shall be open only to members and associate members at any time. A member or associate member may at any time invite a person into Noisebridge and host that person at Noisebridge as long as that member or associate member remains at Noisebridge. No other person shall be permitted at Noisebridge at any other time.</blockquote>
 
 
with:
 
<blockquote>Noisebridge is open to Members, Associate Members, and guests sponsored by same, at all times. Any person who is not one of the above may be asked to leave if no Member or Associate Member present wishes to sponsor them at that time, with no other justification being necessary.</blockquote>
 
<blockquote>People coming to Noisebridge who don't know anyone should be introduced to members who are present so that sponsorship can occur if members present choose to do so at that time. Noisebridge should present itself as "open to public visitors and guests as often as possible".</blockquote>
 
|[[User:flamsmark|Tom]]
 

Revision as of 21:22, 11 February 2014

This is a page for hosting consensus items currently under debate, with their formal wording.

The Consensus Items History is the public record of consensus items that have been decided on in the past. Please move the records from the "Current" page to the "History" page once they've been approved/blocked.

Date First Discussed Proposed By Informal Title Wording Author of this Record
2014-02-10 Greg Ask if notes are okay? The moderator of the weekly meeting should ask if people think that the prior weeks meeting notes are accurate and sufficient. (I invite amendments to the language - the purpose is to avoid confusion and shadow the procedure in formal meetings to approve the prior meetings minutes) Greg
2014-02-09 Robin Ban Pidgeon Pidgeon is unwelcome at Noisebridge. They are prohibited from entering the space or participating in the community. Robin
2014-01-21 (discussed? not in meeting notes) Tom Ban Lee Sonko Lee Sonko is unwelcome at Noisebridge. He is prohibited from entering the space or participating in the community. Tom
2014-1-9 Dana Consensus process change 1. Consensus items at weekly meetings can be stopped from advancing by three member stand-asides or one block. Those objecting are encouraged to meet with proposal author(s) to develop mutually agreeable alternatives.

2. Membership meetings shall be scheduled and announced in advance. If a proposal cannot reach consensus or resolution at weekly meetings it may be added to a membership meeting agenda with sponsorship of three members. To take effect a proposal would require approval of 75% of members present physically or by proxy.

3. All current associate members shall be converted to full members, and the associate membership role abolished.

Dana
2014-1-8 Al In mediation Ban Dan Mediation complete. Mediators: Praveen, Madelynn.

Ban Dan from the space for a pattern of verbal abuse against Al.

Al
2013-12-10 Kevin Tabled until details are elaborated Expiration period for associate member policy Noisebridge should attach an expiration period of 90 days to the consensus decision to create new Member role. All subsequent mutations of the original consensus should be brought for a second consensus. If no consensus can be reached, Noisebridge will revert to being open to the public. Kevin
Personal tools