Editing
Meeting Notes 2020 05 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!
=== Continued Consensus on leasing 272 Capp Street === Consensus initially proposed on 19 May 2019 by bfb, titled "272 Capp Lease Agreement" and is further defined as "That Noisebridge enter into the lease agreement with addendum at 272 Capp Street" '''x:''' Would any Members like to block right now? [crickets] '''x:''' Can I get Members present to identify themselves for a quorum? * Tyler: present * Tim * pyconaut: present * lxpk: here. * Lady Red: Here * bfb present and sound of mind - i think * nthmost: Yeah Iβm here, and Iβm a [M]ember, and Iβm informed. '''x:''' I believe that is sufficient to constitute a quorum. Would anyone like to form a stack for discussion on any points regarding this Consensus Item? '''pyconaut:''' Aye. '''x:''' Please keep comments as brief as possible and on-topic. '''pyconaut:''' Question: Can someone post on Slack that we might be consensing right now to see if there's anyone else who might have left who wanted to come back? '''x:''' Let's not do at @-everyone because people might be sleeping. '''lxpk:''' Could I do an @here? '''x:''' I leave it to y'all. '''Tyler:''' NB is within 15 timezones, is the notification that I get, so it will probably wake up someone. '''x:''' [question about pronunciation] * [community learns the true pronunciation of pyconaut] '''pyconaut:''' It's not English but it's pronounced like 'psychonaut'. * ryan also claims to go by home-fry '''x:''' Do you feel Slack has been notified? '''pyconaut:''' Sure. But it is 11pm, so are we in our right mind? do we want to call an emergency meeting tomorrow for final consensus? '''lxpk:''' We @everyone'd earlier, we said we were going to consense on it, it's a year-old item, I feel the community has been duly notified. '''Kinnard:''' The other Consensus Item is about not doing this right now. Are we in our right mind? We should let the community coalesce. Someone posted in Slack about are meetings even happening right now?. I don't see the harm in taking what the community might consense on to the 2169 landlord and saying you got one week to come to the table with something better. I don't know if you saw in the chat, but Victor said the crowdraise is feasible, but that it shouldn't necessarily block moving to a new building. '''Tim:''' We heard from David earlier that he thinks the building is good. That opinion matters to me; it's enough for me to consense. Does anyone feel like 272 wouldn't be able to be the new NB? '''pyconaut:''' I know lxpk has worked on making a 3D model of the space, which he posted a couple pictures of the space. I've started thinking about layout plans and stuff. We still currently do not have any sort of plan about how we're going to lay stuff out and just want to remind people of that. There will be fights over things like building rooms and where stuff goes. I don't think this should hold us back from signing the lease because signing the lease will kick us into high gear on doing this. It'd be a good idea to say we've consensed that the Board will sign the lease, but we can have a couple weeks of leeway while we're trying to design the space before we sign the lease. '''Tim:''' What do you mean by leeway? '''pyconaut:''' We can consense right now on saying the Board can sign the lease. The Board can wait and if we have enough pushback, which usually happens retroactively, it could be a very good point of contention to see how much pushback we get. So could we put in that we consense that the Board can sign the lease, but the Board should not sign the lease for another week? This is just an idea. '''tim:''' Is there anything wrong with the building ''directly'' that says no we can't be there? '''lxpk:''' From what I've seen and David's report it all looks good. '''tim:''' OK, I agree to it. I consense on signing the lease. '''Tyler:''' Going back to tim's question, where we put the woodshop is not a lease-breaking kind of decision. Or what's the sqftage of the woodshop or where does the laser-cutter go. I don't think we should try to hold back Consensus just because we don't know where to put it. We have another 1000 sqft compared to 2169; it'll fit. '''tim:''' I'm satisfied. '''Lady Red:''' I'm totally on board. I wanna sign it. I think we shouldn't wait on having the full plan before we sign. It'll change in six months anyway. '''Kinnard:''' It seems like the conversation about the sprinklers was a little brief but David seems like a domain expert who's morally aligned with NB as a community. To me, this is reminiscent of the conversation about the door and the lock at the start of quarantine, which happened very quickly. It'd be good to have everyone come together and tackle this once we can do that. '''lxpk:''' I want to address Kinnard's response to a couple of things we've said, and maybe he can explain, because I didn't hear him respond to the core things we said. We said that our perception of the community response to this is that most people who are informed of all the trade-offs of 2169 vs 272 see this as better in every way, and allowing us to grow in occupancy and use to multiples of what it is now. You said there's a supermajority of informed persons who oppose the move, but we haven't heard from them at these meetings. I don't think the most salient reason for that is that we haven't been holding meetings in person. We've been holding these meetings for years, and have signed a few temporary leases at 2169. We've never had a space with as many pluses lined up as this one. Your idea of a fundraise to buy the building is something I want to encourage. But I don't want to bank NB's future on something that doesn't seem bankable. The idea that you're going to meet with the landlord doesn't seem to reflect having heard what people are saying. They're going to tear out SparkleForge anyway. We're not on the verge of being declared a landmark and gaining special status; we're on the verge of having our stuff ripped out and being out on the street. When we moved to 2169, we had a small space that was the best we could do at the time. We didn't have a complete floorplan; we just knew it was going to be better. This space is a bigger space, a better space, can have more people, it's better in every way. We haven't seen people coming to the meetings saying we shouldn't move, other than you. That's why I feel we should move. We've looked through all the doors and avenues available to us, and that's why I'm in favor of consensing. '''Gabriel:''' The previous person mentioned that the only person who's been promoting the idea that 2169 is better than 272 is Kinnard. I haven't heard from Kinnard any reasons why 2169 is better, just process reasons. So Kinnard, why is 2169 better than 272? '''Kinnard:''' I think what NB should do is buy 2169 and then expand into adjacent properties. 2169 has a lot of synergies. It's not that it [272] has a drive-up garage door or is on the ground floor; it's that [2169] is the space that the community has become as big of a deal as it is in. I think the situation is less dire with the landlord. I'm not the only person who's voiced it; there's people who's been saying yeah, we'd love to say. I think the point that we need to consense on moving right now, tonight, during this global crisis, is a little bit disjoint. There's probably people in the community whose lives have been disrupted if not shattered, and we should coalesce first. '''Zach:''' [dropped off] '''Gabriel:''' It is people's responsibility to participate and speak. If they're not here, not participating, that's on them. If they're trying to pass this message through you, it's better if whoever that is just says what they want to say. We can't have a conversation by game of telephone with some anonymous person. '''Kinnard:''' Yeah, I didn't sign up to be a relayer. There's a slant in the community between those who are the most vocal and the loudest, and it's not good for the community to make decisions based on who is loudest, but if people don't say anything... '''β ©:''' Consensus clarification and being anonymous, talk to more folks, particularly Members. There is a process well-defined historically and maybe we've lapsed in communicating this, but the process around consensus: If people are uncomfortable, even if not a Member, Members' responsibility includes proxies and making themselves available for community members to raise concerns. '''bfb:''' I really appreciate your voice in this, Kinnard. It's not easy to be the lone voice of opposition. It has helped crystallize my thinking that this is the right move. We've explored the edge cases, looked at alternatives; to me, they're not viable. I just see lots and lots of upside at 272. But I do appreciate your willingness to speak up. On concerns last week about making this meeting as possible: Announcements made, time and place, sharing the links. I made some effort to put it into the various mediums of Noisebridge discuss, the mailing list, Slack. Every time you bring up that example of David Lopez posting that, is there a meeting?, that was right after people had posted that there was a meeting. nthmost noted in the chat that this meeting has been happening every week for a long time. I feel like we've given everyone the chance to weigh in and urge us to reconsider. At this point, I'm ready to move ahead. We have 28 most excellent participantse; if we were to try to push this another week or to an emergencey meeting, participation would diminish; I'm ready to go tonight. '''Carl:''' I strongly support this move. Near BART, near current location, comes just at the right time as we need to move away from 2169 as has been well-articulated. I say this as someone who has been going to NB [in 2169] for many years, and I'll miss it very much. I love this community, and I look forward to the next ten years at this new location. Thank you to everyone who has put considerable time and effort in and I hope we can quickly sign the lease. '''nthmost:''' This is exactly why I argued that this shouldn't be a matter of Consensus at all. It should've been done do-ocratically. I posted a link in Slack on rough consensus and running code, which I encourage y'all to read. It's the IETF principles and philosophy behind them, and you should prioritize running code. NB is not a good place to run code. We were up until the City noticed our problems. Kinnard should link up with Alice Townes who still has a connection to the landlord and give it a shot on buying the building. But also, we should sign the lease and move. If we have two Noisebridges, cool. '''tim:''' Yeah, it'll be open. '''Someone:''' Build a bridge! '''x:''' Any particular reason you favor doocracy over Consensus for this? I appreciate Consensus in that it codifies and clarifies that we're doing this as a community. '''nthmost:''' (β’_β’) / ( β’_β’)>ββ -β / (ββ _β ) '''nthmost:''' No-one can move NB by themself, or with 10 people, or with 20 people. Doocratically, if it's possible to move NB, you need a 'rough consensus' as they say in the IETF. We didn't seek Consensus in the 2014 Reboot, because we had tried to shut down NB the previous year via Consensus the previous year because a small number of people kept blocking Consensus because they relied on NB being open, whether for the kitchen or because they were sleeping on the couch. '''x:''' There were a lot of specifics, but I hear you supporting this plan. '''pyconaut:''' I definitely understand the concerns with moving. I do want to say, a lot of people overestimate how hard it is to move, mainly because of stress being a factor. I literally single-handedly moved a startup that owned a quarter of what NB does, single-handedly. I helped a number of NBers move. It's the bureaucracy and logistics that are tiring about moving; the physical part is the easiest to do. For people who don't want to move because they're scared, it's understandable. But think about what we can become. Don't think about where we are, think about where we can be. There's a lot of difference between the two spaces, and I do think it's a good idea to have some people completely focus on trying to buy 2169 while the rest of us move. We might even leave certain things behind, which we were probably going to do anyways. Then we'd have 11,000 sqft of usable space. But I think we've spent enough years debating whether to move and I think it will be a good drive for a lot of people if we start the moving process. For years, I wanted a space where I could bring friends that currently can never get into the space because of it being on the third floor. I know people who've wanted us to have better tools of certain types, or wanted a biolab. There's so many projects people can't do at our current space. People who think we can only be NB in our current space; I don't see many people that actually believe we need to be in 2169 and if they do exist, I'll happily create an anonymous Google Form that people can fill out Slack, Discuss, wherever if they have any complaints about moving, because yeah, sometimes maybe a Google Form can be useful, but we've been working on this for years but the complaints have always been minimal or not complaints but questions. Like, there's a difference between wanting to stay vs. move vs. what you like about the old space and what you like about the new space. '''Kinnard:''' What's the risk or damage of waiting one last week? What I hoped I would do over the past week is recruit people who've been opposed to join the meeting and speak in opposition. I've had a crazy week, but I did post the Consensus Item on freezing moving vs. not moving. So what's the material damage from waiting another week, and can we over that time broadly survey using our existing organs of communication? '''jermops:''' What's wrong with the process so far? There've been ample places for people to speak up; why one more week, and next week would it be one more week again? '''Kinnard:''' Not from me, but I might reach out to people who've spoken to me. I wouldn't really have much more after that. '''Tyler:''' You started #nbremain on March 8, and did a bunch of posting after that. '''Kinnard:''' I don't think people pinging in on Slack is necessarily indicative. A lot of people aren't on Slack. People come up to me and say, not just as side comments 'we should stay'. I don't necessarily know these people's names... '''Someone:''' So what's another week going to do? '''Kinnard:''' I did make that other Consensus item. If there's no-one else talking about this after another week, it's a stark contrast once I've been able to share my Consensus Item which I haven't been able to do. '''bfb:''' One risk is the lease falls through. Tyler's been keeping that relationship alive, but the landlord won't wait forever. A lot of people have been working on this and we shouldn't keep delaying the fruits of their labor. Another greater risk is a group of doacrats move forward with the lease sans consensus as Naomi proposed. This would bring orders of magnitude greater fallout beyond the reboot. '''Tyler:''' I don't think a week will matter. This seems like filibustering; you're just dragging the meeting out as long as possible. I don't want to keep on - we're down to 26 from 36 participants; I don't want to keep dropping people as we go. We've followed due process, due Consensus process for the lease, plus we've been talking about it for three or four months. I don't think people are out of the loop. You just said you hear from these people who you don't know their names or how to contact them. This just seems like a slowing-down-the-process kind of thing and I don't think it's helpful to the cause. '''pyconaut:''' Talking directly to people, if they are not informed about what is currently happening, then how are they making an informed opinion about wanting NB to stay or leave? And if they are so interested? Then they should have provided to you that the reasons why they want to stay in conjunction with the current information that has been provided to everyone if they searched for it. If people have a problem with us moving, it has to be a real problem. I have never in the past four month heard a real problem from an unnamed individual about us moving. If there are, we need to know that stuff and if you can't tell us their names or stuff, are you able to quote what they said? '''Kinnard:''' I talked to Ahmad recently, and Mohammad, and Ahmad isn't in this meeting but he has been running the 3D printers. Not like he doesn't know what's going on. He said he isn't able to block because he's not a Member. I hear from people who say we should stay, and we should fundraise to stay, but they're not process people. '''pyconaut:''' Why do they want to stay? '''Kinnard:''' [silence] have another week to try to vocalize. I hear people saying it wouldn't make a difference; I think it would, but I'm fine with people disagreeing with me. WRT me saying supermajority: Most of the people in the meeting have said it'd be great if we could stay, but they don't see it as a possibility. '''x:''' Please don't speak for folks who aren't present unless things are otherwise structured. There haven't been any blocks; we've met the minimum requirements. Tyler, for formality, would you take the floor and see if I'm missing any Members violently raising their hands? '''Tyler:''' Yeah, I want this meeting to (1) end and (2) end on a positive note. So, four hours end, call for blocks on the Consensus proposal to move to 272 Capp St. Would anyone issue a block? [crickets] [tumbleweed rolls past] '''tim:''' Calling it. Consensed. [applause] '''pyconaut:''' Can we have a written list of all the Members who just Consensed? * tyler * tim * ryan * lxpk * lady red (/me never here and condensing.) * nthmost * carl * x? <-- neither confirms || denies * '''pyconaut:''' Last time we had that many Members was when were consensing on the previous move (that did not happen, gurrero). Otherwise, that's the most Members in like three years. '''Aaron:''' I was gonna throw some flame, but because it seems that the Consensus has passed, I just wanna say congratulations to everybody, because this is definitely a big move for ourselves and the community. I only joined NB recently. The first time I went to NB was the day before SIP. But, I just wanna say, congratulations. I was gonna say earlier that instead of pushing back Consensus on whether we should move or stress on buying the space or whatnot, we should take the opportunity, now that we're moving, to rebuild our community, even though it's literally behind the old building, take this time to redevelop, and improve what we already have. It's not about the building, it's about our people, our hackers. '''Lady Red:''' To the new Noisebridge! [cheers] ***Stack:*** * Lady Red (for the cheers) * Roy >> Open Mic? <<
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