Current Consensus Items: Difference between revisions

From Noisebridge
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
m (updated to reflect summary title, and text of motion)
 
(426 intermediate revisions by 89 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{meetings}}
This is a page for hosting consensus items currently under debate, with their formal wording.
This is a page for hosting consensus items currently under debate, with their formal wording.


The [[Consensus_Items_History|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.
You might be looking for
* the [[Draft Consensus Items]] page, instead? If your consensus item still drafty, in need of much revision, and not something that you think people already can more or less agree with.
* [[Consensus_Items_History|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.


{| border="1"
{| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
! Date First Discussed  
 
! Proposed By
|-
! Wording
| Date First Discussed [[XX Month, Year]]
! Author of this Record
| Proposed By [[User:User|User]]
| Informal Summary Title
| Body of Motion
| Author of this Record [[User:User|User]]
|-
 
|-
| September 5th, 2023
| proposed by [[User:Mwillson|Mark]]
| 2 member block -- for only freeform motions -- temporary 3 month effect, renew
| Renewing May 23rd Consensus Item
REVIEWING as of Feb 27th, 2024
Updating blocking requirement for big C consensus items from 1 to 2 people. Currently in order to block a big C consensus Item, we need only 1 member to block. Would like to update this number to 2 members. Perhaps the 1 member to block made sense when the community was tiny. It doesn't make sense anymore in our much larger community. If you cant convince anyone else to block with you, then maybe you just have bad ideas. The community should not have to make changes only folks with bad ideas think are good.
 
This change would be provisional for 3 months [from May 23, 2023]. Also would only apply for member proposed consensus items, non-member proposed consensus items would still be block able by a single member. Also only 1 member would be required to block new membership. Also if any one member would like to block, but cannot because they are alone, they can request a 1 week hold to defer decision for an additional 3rd week.
|Author of this record: [[User:Mwillson|Mark]]
|-
|-
| [[Meeting_Notes_2013_11_26|2013-12-3]]
 
| [[User:AlSweigart|Al Sweigart]]
| Noisebridge should maintain lockers that people can pay a monthly fee to put a lock on for storing equipment and long-term projects. The full details will be on the [[Locker_Protocol]] wiki page.
| [[User:AlSweigart|Al Sweigart]]
|-
|-
| [[Meeting_Notes_2013_11_26|2013-11-26]]
| March 12th, 2024
| [[User:AlSweigart|Al Sweigart]]
| proposed by [[User:LX|LX]]
| The "optional member dues" change to the 2013-10-15 "Associates Member" consensus item is a large enough change that discussion of the consensus item should have been extended so that members not in attendance could debate it. This consensus item invalidates the 2013-10-15 consensus item so that this discussion can take place and the membership can come to a consensus/block it.
| Consensus to 86 [[User:Gssp|Benjamin]].
| [[User:AlSweigart|Al Sweigart]]
|
| Author of this Record: [[User:Mcint|Loren]]
|-
|-
|[[Meeting_Notes_2013_11_19|2013-11-19]]
|[[User:Jerkey|Jake]]
|Jake proposes a change to the previous consensus agreement regarding access to Noisebridge.


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>
| March 12th, 2024
<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>
| proposed by [[User:LX|LX]]
|[[User:flamsmark|Tom]]
| Consensus to 86 Fromsa.
|
| Author of this Record: [[User:Mcint|Loren]]
|-
 
 
!
!
!
!
!
 
 
<!-- open consensus item with meeting discussion for over two weeks, no blocks, rolling back to draft for further illumination
|-
| February 16th, MMXXI
| Ⅹ
| Be excellent to each other.
| Fiscal Sponsorship for noisebridge.space project & Party == ON
| ɲ
| Author of this Record [[User:User|User]]
-->
 
|}

Latest revision as of 20:01, 19 March 2024

Noisebridge | About | Visit | 272 | Manual | Contact | Guilds | Resources | Events | Projects | 5MoF | Meetings | Donate | (Edit)
Meetings | Process Meeting Template | Discussion Meeting Template | Archive | Metaguild Archive | Current Consensus Items | Consensus History | Announcements | Facilitation | Note-taking | (Edit)

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

You might be looking for

  • the Draft Consensus Items page, instead? If your consensus item still drafty, in need of much revision, and not something that you think people already can more or less agree with.
  • 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 XX Month, Year Proposed By User Informal Summary Title Body of Motion Author of this Record User
September 5th, 2023 proposed by Mark 2 member block -- for only freeform motions -- temporary 3 month effect, renew Renewing May 23rd Consensus Item

REVIEWING as of Feb 27th, 2024 Updating blocking requirement for big C consensus items from 1 to 2 people. Currently in order to block a big C consensus Item, we need only 1 member to block. Would like to update this number to 2 members. Perhaps the 1 member to block made sense when the community was tiny. It doesn't make sense anymore in our much larger community. If you cant convince anyone else to block with you, then maybe you just have bad ideas. The community should not have to make changes only folks with bad ideas think are good.

This change would be provisional for 3 months [from May 23, 2023]. Also would only apply for member proposed consensus items, non-member proposed consensus items would still be block able by a single member. Also only 1 member would be required to block new membership. Also if any one member would like to block, but cannot because they are alone, they can request a 1 week hold to defer decision for an additional 3rd week.

Author of this record: Mark
March 12th, 2024 proposed by LX Consensus to 86 Benjamin. Author of this Record: Loren
March 12th, 2024 proposed by LX Consensus to 86 Fromsa. Author of this Record: Loren