Editing
Meeting Notes 2020 06 09
(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!
=== [[ Current Consensus Items | Proposals from last week ]] === ''(Add any items which are consensed upon or someone has raised a principle objection for to the [[Consensus Items History]] page.)'' {| class="wikitable sortable" border="1" ! Date First Discussed ! Proposed By ! Informal Title ! Summary ! Author of this Record |- | 26 May 2020 (informally discussed meetings prior) | [[User:ZAAA|ZAAA]] | Closing Noisebridge during the COVID-19 Pandemic | I am submitting the formalized closure of Noisebridge during Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the current COVID-19 pandemic.<br>With [https://covid19.ca.gov/ 98,980 cases and 3,884 deaths] in California as of this writing, it is essential that Noisebridge stay closed in order not to further spread this virus in our communities. <br>SF's cases are still [https://data.sfgov.org/stories/s/dak2-gvuj surging upward] and the Mission neighborhood is tied for the [https://data.sfgov.org/stories/s/bj8f-r6sy highest area for positive cases.] <br><br>With the exceptions of:<p> 1. Consensed temporary use only to make PPE / life-saving medical equipment (following the safety orders outlined by the Governer: https://covid19.ca.gov/pdf/guidance-office-workspaces.pdf)<br> 2. Consensed moving to the new space (272 Capp Street) for Noisebridge's survival<br> 3. Emptying out personal belongings from the space (1 person at a time)<br><br> I propose the physical location of Noisebridge (2169 Mission St.) be physically closed for all other functions. I support us to remain open virtually with classes, meetings, and other events happening online. | [[User:Zaaa|Zaaa]] |- |} Za: This is already the informal rule for NB. Locks have been changed, people have been told the space is closed, but not everyone is honoring it or hearing it. Making it official will help. It's in line with the law. ... Last week, people asked a ton of questions on it. This is the second week this item is on the table. No one has reached out to me about any qualms. Pyconaut: any questions? f: What's the actual action we want to follow if this is consensed on? Za: As I mentioned last week, this is just a baby step. It's not an action item itself. I didn't include anything like that because it would make this harder to pass. I tried to make this as simple as possible. f: I agree we should have this in writing. Za: It's a good question, a question we ask after this passes. Robert: Maybe in the language, to make it a little more clear, say it's an action item of thinking, of figuring out how the community should be responding. Za: This is the second week though. By omission, I thought it would be clear that there would be no action to be done. Mark: I don't see any problems, personally. But, I'm also not a Member. Za: But you're a part of the community. Mark: Unless you want to add clear action items. Za: This is just a first step. I could write items tonight/tomorrow. Anyone could add action items. Mark: I feel a little removed from this. Haven't been to NB in a while. I can edit websites/the wiki, but that's the extent of my involvement. Za: I haven't been to the space in over a year. pyconaut: One of the spacewatchers showed me the space earlier today. It's pretty packed up, and it seems like most people have left. Pyconaut- I propose that this concensus item is brought to consensus, Za- I second Mark - Do we have a quorum? Pyconaut- Unsure Za - this is not an irreversible decision. There were many members present last week who had a chance to voice any concerns. We would like to recah out to all other members if possible, but I just want to move this along. If someone disagrees with it and we find out later, I will personally talk to them and we can try to hash out any concerns.. Mark: What's the number of Members we need for a quorum? pyconaut: It's been 3, but that was when there was more Members. If we get one more Member... <Mark tries to contact another Member> Gabriel: Are Membership applications happening remotely? pyconaut: Philanthropy applications can be done remotely, but I don't know how people would feel about granting Membership remotely. <lxpk joins the meeting> lxpk: I've been listening to the meeting. pyconaut: Is there any Member present who block this consensus item? I should ask, lxpk, do you have any questions first? lxpk: Does anyone see any downsides to doing this? <silence> lxpk: Ok. pyconaut: So I'll ask again, are there any Members who block this item? Ok, this item is consensed! Members present: Pyconaut LXPK Za Yay! {| class="wikitable sortable" border="1" ! Date First Discussed ! Proposed By ! Informal Title ! Summary ! Author of this Record |- | 26 May 2020 (informally discussed meetings prior) | [[User:ZAAA|ZAAA]] | Limiting people at Noisebridge during the COVID-19 Pandemic | I am submitting for consensus for limiting the number of people at Noisebridge during the Pandemic to no more than four (4) people in the space at any given time. <p> I think we should err on the side of caution and work to be safe, using the safety orders outlined by the Governer: https://covid19.ca.gov/pdf/guidance-office-workspaces.pdf as a bare minimum starting point.<br> Note, that this order recommends "physical distancing to the maximum extent possible." | [[User:Zaaa|Zaaa]] |- |} pyconaut: I have heard a block for this one, that has been proxied to me. Za: Is that from Tyler? Can you mention what that was about, or should I read the item... Pyconaut: yes Zac: Last meeting, lot of people had questions and then agreed with it. In the chat, Tyler said he would block and then he left. I messaged him to ask him about it: "Hey, I saw as you were leaving the meeting on Tuesday that you said you would block the consensus item I proposed for limiting the number of people in the space during covid (specifically California Phase 1 and Phase 2). I was hoping we could open a dialogue about this and I’d love to know where you’re coming from and what your concerns are -Za" Za: I recognize this is a super stressful time. I'm wondering what he said to you, pyconaut, because I'm left in the dark. I don't know what the rules are about proxying. pyconaut: In the case of Membership blocking, you don't have to say anything. But in the case of consensus items, it's in good faith to discuss the details. Part of this is, Tyler has been worn out. He's done ~90% of the work regarding our lease, as well as working as our treasurer, rebuilding our treasury system. He's very busy right now with our finalized lease negotiation. He's making sure everything is getting signed by who has to. Za- In the interest of time, can we jump to what is relevant to this consensus item specifically? pyconaut: Let me bring up what he sent me... From tyler to pyconaut: "1 - I think it warrants more discussion 2 - 4 people is far below the current guidelines of 1/4 Fire capacity 3 - if make the number unreasonably low (like 4) it means that the rule will be entirely ignored.I mean, there are 4 people or more at noisebridge on a daily basis right now. Imagine in two months when bars and gyms are back in business and people have largely forgotten covid. No-one is going to listen to a "4 person max" sign. I think the better solution is setting the number closer to 20, and having a regular sanitation schedule. And yea I'll convey these thoughts more publicly. I just didn't get a chance to last the full meeting" pyconaut: The proxy was passed on to me from someone who had to leave during the pre-meeting. lxpk: Are you capable of explaining it? pyconaut: There is worry that people will ignore the 4-person rule. I think this will be different since we have now formally closed Noisebridge. I think it makes sense to lower our number to 4 people. But I do think this is something people want to discuss further. lxpk: What exactly is the 4 number based on? You said it's the middle ground between 2 and 6. It's based on the stairway increasing the probability people will run into each other? Za: Yes, but I expected people to want a higher number, and we'd discuss. There's the issue of the stairway (a non-visible stairway where you can run into people), the air quality/ventilation in the space (already very poor), and there are not many exits. Another point is, how many people can you have in the space who can maintain 6 ft away from each other? lxpk: It seems like it's more important that we have a fixed number than no number. Robert: I've definitely seen the attitudes of the people who are at NB. They don't seem to come to the meetings as often. Maybe reaching out... It's a complicated issue, and we need to talk about it. Za: I wholeheartedly agree with what both of you said. The number was meant to be a starting point for discussion. One important point I wanted to mention, Tyler said that people will want to show up to the space more when gyms & bars reopen. The consensus item was meant for phases 1 and 2, and bars are in phase 3. This is following the governor's guidelines for safety. Our neighborhood is being hit especially hard. 94% of cases in the Mission are Latino, so this is a Black and rown issue. People are dying. That's why I put this consensus item. ... I feel very uncomfortable with 20 people being in the space. At the last meeting, we all agreed except for Tyler, so will have to talk about this. Robert: One thing Tyler said, that people would be unhappy and not follow the rule. Something I remember is when you're trying to change a company culture, you don't put down hard rules, but instill? behaviors. Like cleaning the space... Having a positive reward would help, but I don't know what that would be yet. Za: First off, the idea of not passing a rule because people might not follow it is a strange approach. When they passed SIP, people were unhappy. There are people going to the beach, having house parties. There are always people who won't follow rules and who don't care. But having rules won't harm anyone. Like not being able to sleep at NB. It took a while for it to become a rule, but now people understand. It's not proposing an action. It doesn't mean that if you show up at NB, you're banned or something. It might mean we swap people or come up with a rotation schedule. I think Robert's right, we come up with rewards. He's already doing it! The virtual classes are a reward. It's a fun thing that encourages people to stay home, something they can do while they're at home. Tyler and other have recommended the idea of sanitizing the space. My question is, how much bleach/sanitization materials do we have to keep doing that? When I looked for it for my own place, it was hard to find. Is it wasteful when people need those things for their homes and in the hospitals? What's our supply chain on sanitization materials? lxpk: X suggested we have someone oversee these measures, someone to be on-site to advise people on how to follow the measures. We could discuss all the details at every meeting. This kind of needs to be a little team to implement safety on an ongoing basis. Gabriel: WRT what phase 2 entails, it might not be bars, but there are spaces that feel very similar to NB that are allowed to be open. Za: It's kind of scary, to be honest. The government has a huge economic interest in reopening. NB can be a leader in what is safe, a leader in science of what the medical literature says. Infection rates are not going down. I think we can be safer than, and I'm pushing for being safer than, what the government is suggesting. We're not an essential business. The point of phase 2 is so those people don't go out of business and lose their livelihood. NB is different, we don't have employees who have to feed their children. Gabriel: I want to be clear, that just because we look somewhat similar to an office, that doesn't mean we should be reopening. Schools are reopening on July something? Za: I wasn't trying to accuse you of posing any position. Just my takeaway on that. It's a line of discussion I've heard a number of times. I heard from my friend who is a teacher, that they are facing eviction... I suspect that [reopening date] will be rescinded, especially after the huge protests. There's a lot of government pushback right now. The government does things all the time, things that are not safe. The people we should listen to during this pandemic are medical first-responders, scientists who are experts, and the people who are most vulnerable. I want to encourage people to listen to those sources instead of news outlets. I've compiled a list to check out. pyconaut: For me, right now I'm focusing on the move. I think that's one of the reason people want a lot of people be allowed in the space. The max I feel comfortable with during the move is 6 people. I think 4 is a very, very good number for the move. It's about being patient and well-planned. We will have 2 places to have this 4-person rule, and I don't think it will take all that long to move NB. What will take long is building out the new NB. When it comes to the move, I don't think we should be putting a consensus item like this on hold just because we're worried about not being able to move quickly. Right now most of NB is already packed up, which was done by like 2 people over the past 2 weeks. One room was packed up by one person in about 20 hours. I think it's unwarranted to worry about not having enough people to move. We should prioritize safety. The plan I'm creating is assuming there will only ever be 4 people moving stuff. Gabriel: My understanding is that our lease says we don't ... until 30 days after the SIP order is over. I thought that meant that's at least past phase 2. pyconaut: There's a difference between building access and the start of the lease. We are able to move in before we start our lease. We are able to move in after we sign the papers. What we have to do to move in, is sign the lease papers (currently overseen by Tyler and Alice), pay our down payment, and after landlord confirms the payment, we can use the space. We can use it indefinitely. If the SIP doesn't end till 2021, we would not start paying rent until 2021. But we would have access to the space. We are going to start moving well before SIP ends. Part of the reason is that moving is deemed an essential service. People are allowed to move, whether they're an individual or a business. There are probably some guidelines we should look into. But we're already in the process of preparing to move. I want us to have a good understanding of how many people will be helping us move, and I want to give them a clear outline of how they can be safe and how NB will try to keep them safe. Dan (via chat): agree NB should be safe as possible ... I support the current proposal to limit to 4 - for now still would expect for longer term flexibility, Consensus would also be put to good use by setting up a general framework for nailing down specific details which will change over time - probably faster than the NB formal Consensus process can keep up with. that is all Robert: Dan said what I was going to ask everyone. Think about one thing we can implement that we haven't done yet, or that we can do better. It would awesome to hear any ideas. pyconaut: It does look like this will be pushed back another week. But now that NB is formally closed, people should not be going to space except to grab their stuff, to pack, or to check on the space. Hopefully there are no events happening at NB. The PPE project doesn't seem to be happening, so the 3D printers shouldn't be on. Za: Is anyone here opposed to this consensus item? Or is there anything that should change about it? Mark: I suggest drafting more specific language into the consensus item that would serve as a compromise. f: Something we could add is a limit of keys, since that seems to be a problem. Not that that will stop them from letting more people in, but that could help. Za: Totally see where people are coming from. I'm concerned the block doesn't have to do with the level of detail, but that it's a disagreement about 4 people being the limit. No amount of detail will change that part of the block. pyconaut: Does anyone else have concerns about 4 being too low a number? Robert: Maybe making it clear that it's 4 per space. Za: A clarifying thing on that - I'm happy to add that. I wrote this worried about the current 2169 space. I'm happy to add that, but it might be something that causes it to be blocked. Since Tyler blocked, he has to come on board. Za: The reason I'm asking if anyone here is blocking, I want to know if everyone else is onboard with the item in its current iteration... By bars & gyms, does he mean phase 2, we need more info from tyler. Za: I want to make sure other people can say stuff too. Feel free to chime in. It's a conversation with everyone right now. <Tyler arrives> Tyler: I'm caught up on the meeting. Can hop right into the rebuttals. I think 4 people is too low, so it will not be followed. Today NB had 5 people there. If you set a rule that is roughly unreachable, it will be completely ignored. If it's more reasonable, it's something we can post and have people follow. Robert: Tyler, I do agree with that in the sense that this time it's 5, next time it will be 4.5 or 6. When you have 5 people there, and there were 4 people there originally, it's hard psychologically to boot someone. If you say 6-7, there's a higher chance that someone will be able to say, we need to be careful and there are too many people... Gabriel: I'm just wondering about the context of the 5 people in the space today. Tyler: Someone has to go in there to kick them out. My plan, though passive-aggressive, is to take every single chair out of NB after we get the keys to 272 Capp. Gabriel: So it's just people hanging out at NB? Tyler: Yes. Za: It's really sad to hear that our collective makerspace is being used as a living room. It's not to shame anyone, this is really hard stuff. For me to relate sometimes is a little tricky. As an immuno-compromised person, I live like it's SIP all the time. For the rest of society, they're trying to figure out what to do when they can't see people. They can technically. It's not about shaming people or playing good cop bad cop, but it's about coming together as a community and deciding what is safe. It's about deciding on our values. Whether people will follow those values, that can come later. But if we don't have a number in writing at all, anything goes. It could open up some possible liability issues. I want to ask, what's the lowest number you would feel comfortable with, Tyler, and what's the reasoning around it? What are your feelings about stage 1/stage 2? Does the number apply to stage 2? Tyler: When does stage 1 end? Za: I don't know the exact date. Tyler: I just got an email from Touchstone Climbing that they will be open next week. That seems like a way more high-risk type venture than NB. I think 4 is too low, maybe 10 would be a number. 1/4 of fire code allowance would be about 15 people. If you say NB is only 4 people allowed, and they look at other businesses, they will say, well why did they choose 4? pyconaut: I definitely understand trying to follow legal requirements. But legal requirements are not even close to what scientific logic is saying. We're anarchists; the gov't does not exactly dictate the best way to do things. Even if we can legally be at a certain number, ethically/morally we should be at a lower number. We could have mutliple numbers, say 15 people max during closure if there is an emergency. But NB's personal recommended guideline could be 4 people. We could tell people how we came to that number. We have unique issues due to our layout, stairway, and air quality. I think that should play a bigger role than what our fire guidelines say. Za: Tyler, we talked about the number being reached because of the air quality and stairwell. This stuff is vague even coming from the gov't. In order to enter phase 2, there would have to be 1 or fewer cases in the past 14 days, and no deaths in the past 14 days. The gov't has taken this back recently, but the science has not changed that quickly. I want us to be safe. What are your thoughts wrt to phase 2? Should we mimic the gym that's reopening? It's dangerous to do comparisons like that. We can't predict or know how people will respond. But I value your opinion on the matter. from chat by za: What is required to enter the second stage of Phase 2? Any county that wants to accelerate its reopening must submit a 12-page application, called a “local variance attestation,” plus supporting documents. This week, the state lowered its requirements to show “epidemiological stability,” citing increased capacity to test for and trace new cases (changes noted below). The form sets forth a number of criteria counties are required to meet to prove their “readiness.” 1 or fewer cases per 10,000 residents the past 14 days No deaths for the past 14 days No more than 20 confirmed COVID-19 patients hospitalized on any of the past 14 days OR 7-day average of hospitalizations increasing by less than 5% Fewer than 25 new cases per 100,000 residents for the past 14 days (cumulative) OR positive-test rates below 8% for the past seven days Minimum daily testing of 1.5 per 1,000 residents, with recommendation of 2 per 1,000 Testing sites within 30 minutes of 75% of urban residents and 60 minutes source: "https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/05/15/coronavirus-faq-what-does-it-mean-to-enter-californias-phase-2-and-which-parts-of-the-state-qualify/" Tyler: I don't think my opinion matters. Businesses aren't listening to the science. But when it comes down to consensus items, it needs to be useful. People who go to NB right now don't care. How do you keep people in NB safe in that environment? I don't think anyone will listen to the rule, unless we hardcore lock the door and have only one person with the key. Robert: I was thinking offhandedly, what if we started with 4 per space for moving purposes. As the weeks go on, maybe we can increase. If it gets worse, we can change it. It's a fluid thing, and we can change it. pyconaut: Saying 15 people is normal for NB numbers, while 4 is a number with NB closed makes sense. There is a psychological thing about saying a number and giving enough emphasis on it, people will try to follow it. People might think, "If there are people at NB already, should I even bother going?" Even if the rule is broken, it will deter people. While a large number will enable them. I think this consensus item is about being a deterrent. We could get a lock where it's really hard to copy the key. That would be a worthwhile investment for the new space. I think we should have low enough number that it's a deterrent. In my experience, 4 is enough to move NB. Za: I agree with pyconaut and Robert. It's a slippery slope with trying to predict how people will react. There's a precedent for this, during the 2.0 reboot. NB was falling apart, people were not following rules. People were sleeping in the space, selling drugs, shooting up heroin in the restrooms, etc. There was a huge mice infestation. It was really bad. We have precident for a time when noisebridge was closed down and was done outside of concensus We are in just as extreme a case now, and we can take action. Za: I saw that these steps weren't being taken, and I was shocked. I thought they were already being taken. If this was NB 5 years ago, people would be like, why are we having this discussion. I am disabled, all I can do is write this consensus item. If we can have an agreement about this, it's not going to hurt. If we make this more transparent it will be better for everyone and will keep people safe. Tyler: I'm convinced by your logic, pyconaut, that setting a 4 person limit and having people break the rule is better than having a 10 person limit and having 20 people in the space. I withdraw my block. I'm not able to physically enforce it though. Za: I think we're heading towards a discussion item, so can we wrap up this consensus item? Pyconaut: I propose that we bring this item to concensus. can I get a second? Za: second lxpk: I have a question - a general low limit is a deterrent, but there are cases where we might need more than 4 people, like moving the laser cutter. If there's an operation that requires more tha 4 people, we should have a safety coordinator to make sure it's done right. pyconaut: There's no physical way we'll ever get the laser cutter out of the building unless the elevator is working. The only other way to get it out is to open the window in front and hire a crane. In that case, it wouldn't be us moving it. Another thing, all the items so heavy they require more than 4 people to move, we'd be using a dolly and some sort of stair dolly. Those items we will leave till the very end. We can't even plug them in at the new space since we don't have 240W outlet. <back to consensus> lxpk: If we have an operation that requires more than the limit, does this consensus item allow for that? Za: I appreciate that question. As it's written, it doesn't say one way or the other. The previous consensus item does say that consensed actions are an exception to the closure of the space. Pyconaut: Do we have any members that block the item "Crickets" Members present: Tyler Pyconaut Za LXPK
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