Meeting Notes 2014 01 07

Moderator: Danny O'Brien Notetaker: Josh

Attendees: Danny: work on dysfunction democracies & functional programming languges Josh: awesome notetaker, programs for IBM and self, supergenius Ron: hack on liux help people learn Dana: works on geoinformation Brashant: first time at noisebridge Romi: likes to make thnngs Kate: first meeting, programmer, retro video games Al: python for kids Cynthia: retred physician find some to fix macs Norman: Large events, learning mobile platforms Charlie: that's all Naomi : genetic programmer Ari: android dev. Electro music Nick: didn't intend to join meeting, dev, from portland, overworked, happy to contribute Monan: fool around building fixing Robin: bring art and tech together Carl: mobile apps Amy: forgot mouse, still sitting here Kevin: exploring new languages John: programmer, neurosurgeon Douglas: circuit musician Lauren: read about us Sara: use darkroom, write, take photos, crafty Tom: shocked by amount of ambient surveillance X: Hacks on hacker spaces, midway through week of paranoia Darren:

Short Announcements: Lockers now $10 month Norman resigning as noisebridge radio operator X: working to revive spacebridge meets 7:30 tuesdays Blaire volunteers to take over as radio officer godwafflenoisepancakes = Pancakes and free vegan waffles sunday at noon planning on brewing mate for godwafflenoisepancakes first mothly meeting for book fem for men : fem for everyone by bel hooks

Discussion Items: Cost of lockers Agreements without consensus the bridge Membership Binder:

chris wipple: last week taylor austin: last week Harry lesenski: week 2 Kanad Hackathel: last week other guy: last week kate kligman: week 1 alex perez: last week alex pique: last week john shut last sam teppa: last madeline: last douglas botten: last ronald kutoni: 1st Financial Report: 33,214.19 $$ including noisetor ~ 23,000 excluding noisetor 6, 000/month outgoing

Consensus Items: new: cost of lockers, defrayed by rent, something, something no sleeping at noisebridge anti-harassment policy old: change to consensus agreement regarding access to noisebridge - 6 in order to validly pass cons process, items will be on website week before etc. - 6 rename members to council, associate members to members - 0 responsibility of everyone to contribute as they are able - 1 attach expiration of 80 days to associate membership - 1 abandon consensus, use majority associate members to full members - 9 meeting streamed in audio moved to 7pm – 11

- meeting move to 7 – passes provided it is publicized

prefer 8 get more things done if start at 7 gets up at 4 am pdp-11's are awesome 7 pm is good 8pm is ok 7 pm slight preference publicize if we do

- abandon consensus, etc. continue/delay until they get back from CCC will not consense this week just discuss go to disccussion for discussion problematic because of block, gets in the way of progress simply majority has problem, blocking has a problem, compromise supermajority balances like 51% supermajority anti-consensus – tyranny of majority, demographic shift have radical impact, gives power to those with politicking ability, dogmatism of majority consensus fails when you fool all of the people some of the time, you can't fool all the people all the time thank god for consensus, it has passed shitty things, majority alloows slightly smarter people to fool some of the people some of the time the way that consensus is happening right now is not working, but there are other consensus models, like mostly consensus with the option for supermajority on contensious issues, bring someone in to talk about consensus consensus is great but there are problems wih any social construct exploits are possible especially wih a house full of hackers express happiness that above was brought up, different process for different issues, don't spoil (kinda) winning tradition items have lifetime where they die if they are not voted on within time period emotionalism and theatrics will change if system of voting changes don't believe that drama is inherent in consensus, hear how consensus has not been working specifically people have been yelled at for things, their feelings were hurt, feel excluded different things/discussion emailed to Al

Discussion: - the bridge what is it? For what will it be used? X explains: 12 days ago 30c3 starts- logistical challenges with time differences, rearranged things to facilitate area delineated from the rest of noisebridge, work on elaborate projects/have nice things Q/A there's a bed, who will be sleeping there? X has been sleeping there, if anyone were sleeping there they should: not sleep there more than 4 hours, 2 people on the bridge at all times, be fully aware and accept that it may or may not be available, there was tension why refuse to mention bridge && sleep in especial on discusss claims some convo's are on the wiki, he unsubscribed from discuss, purposefully didn't want to do this because he was(n't) a member there is a clear reason: unfriendly rhetorical techniques, scoial matrix of toxicity seems like this is a residency, against terms of lease/zoning, heirarchical model that is counter to the space, doesn't know where this is coming from, place didn't get cleaner when this happened space bridge did get cleaner this is n the spirit of noisebridge, people take ownership because they stay there which helps people feel engaged doesn't want to use discuss because he is creeped out by al jc went against rules? For personal reasons, has been reticent to break it down, he is attached glad we're talking about it, two questions and comment: is the bridge open to public? If not, who determines to whom it's open? Attitudes toward sleep have changed, cleanliness issue, is this a know part of the space to be used by members guests, what? Resmebles residece/place people are not welcome, mixed up? Never been lock or door, never told anyone they are not welcome/ cannot come in, cautions people that innapropriate for children things might be happening, nobody controls access, some people have made use of the pod/space/whatever, no one has directly asked him to disassemble idea of sleeping there not liked, place set aside not good, people prefer if it were opened up people spend a lot of time in part of space, develop sense of ownership, at the end of that process need to take a break 8 people out of 30 asked to have pod taken down not consensus, just asking does anyone favor jc continuing the bridge can the pod be turned into something more fluid/ moved fine with it without sleep pod agrees that removal of sleep pod can be done someone took my fishtank

who the people are how many voted yay or nay? Different topc

Different topic: kitchen, people are upset about things about the kitchen

for consensus next week: anti-harassment policy accepted in current form?. Now that the meeting is over, don't forget to post the meeting notes to the wiki and e-mail the discussion list with a short summary.