Editing
Meeting Notes 2014 08 26
(section)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
= Consensus items = == [[ Consensus Items History | Proposals from last week ]] == * Reciprocal Bans with Sudo Room ** Mitch sez: Kevin updated the wording from last week ** Andy asks: Does anyone want to make a counter point to argue that if someone gets banned from Sudo Room? ** J notes: I think this makes it clear that this is entirely for reasons of safety, not for arbitrary reasons or disagreements ** Scotty: Would we consider someone who was banned from sudo for sleeping a reason of safety *** Torrie adds: I would not feel threatened from a sleeper ** Alex: Is this something that we should need to review on a case-by-case basis? ** Mitch: There is going to be a bay area consortium of hackerspaces unconference in October. All bay spaces should come, and this is something we should be discussing there ** Carl: I would like to see some sort of review process requring a review process ** Dan: It would be helpful to enumerate some examples such as violent, theft, creepy behavior ** Torrie: A review process might not be needed since you can just undo it through the normal safe-space meeting ** Scotty: We should fail fast. We should default to safety until we can figure it out. I'd like to see us err on the side of erring quickly so we don't get burnt out too fast. ** Alex: I feel that we should have an up to date list of this stuff so there is some accountability. Why were the banned, who made accusations, etc ** Monad: I think part of the problem is that we don't have a way to ID if someone is banned, they might not know if someone is banned two years ago ** Torrie recounts the story of a few weeks ago when Howard came in ** Josh: Would it be a bad idea to have a digital list of banned folks and such? ** Alex: We're talking about this in the security group bee tee dubs!! ** Andy: Should we continue discussion or is this something we can consense on? ** Mitch: Do we have a quorum? (a very tiny number raise their hands) ** Devil Dan: I have a friendly amendment. It'd be great if it said instead of "until" it said "unless". It'd remove the inevitability of it being required for discussion. ** (Various discussions about how changing wording of things works with consensus) == [[ Current Consensus Items | Proposals for next week ]] == * Evil Dan: I think it'd be great to have the closing hours, greeter committee, etc supported by consensus. I really enjoy the blog article. Really Cool.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Noisebridge are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (see
Noisebridge:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Log in
Request account
Namespaces
Page
Discussion
English
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Dig in!
Noisebridge
- Status: MOVED
- Donate
- ABOUT
- Accessibility
- Vision
- Blog
Manual
MANUAL
Visitors
Participation
Community Standards
Channels
Operations
Events
EVENTS
Guilds
GUILDS
- Meta
- Electronics
- Fabrication
- Games
- Music
- Library
- Neuro
- Philosophy
- Funding
- Art
- Crypto
- Documentation/Wiki
Wiki
Recent Changes
Random Page
Help
Categories
(Edit)
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information