06/11/13 Notes from the First Noisebridge Rebase meeting.
(Noisebridge abbreviated often as NB)
Attending: Daniel - first time visitor
James - Interested in the idea of the possibility of large projects being done during the Rebase.
Drew - Interested in interface and Procedure, Notes that the tone of discussion surrounding the project has improved.
Elizabeth - Listening in.
Justin - Concerned about the original proposal.
Douglas - Down to help. Hopes to avoid closure.
Dan - Would like to improve the classrooms and provide better support for the those who lead classes in the space. Concern about the open-ness of Noisebridge. Wants to maximise the benfits of Noisebridge. Usually pleasantly surprised by the NB community.
Jarrod - Would like to see a master plan that is visual describing the project. Also proposing spatial changes
J.C. - (Later arrival)
Kevin: - (Later arrival)
Mike: (later arrival)
Discussion: (We start with the issue of meeting procedure and Rebase group procedure)
Drew: It is the work of this committee to present to the NB community stuff for consensus. These thing may not only be procedural. How is NB governing itself in terms of support and service to San Francisco. How to provide infrastructure that Noisebridgers would want to use.
Justin: Downtime. Who here is married to the idea of closing NB? (suggestions form the attendees that they are not married to the idea of closing NB)
James: Not married.
Drew: The space has to be deep cleaned
James: But closed or restricted? Somebody will be in here.
Drew: This would necessitate insuring that only Rebase activity is occurring during that time.
Justin: Other hackerspaces have “buid days” instead. Ahead of time the community is notified that everyone in the space should be building.
James: likley everything must go through consensus
Justin: Yes. Consensus must be used.
James: it is good to set a goal.
Justin: Must set a date such as Minimum two weeks advance notice.
Drew: After the request of Consensus
James: once consensus is reached, two weeks.
Jonny: 1. Changes may be spread out and less overwhelming. ex. list of 20 things. 2. Crucial to get buy in from the community. A list of non-changes. What are we not going to change.
Drew: document what this working group is doing ex.. “NB remains committed to...”
James: Visual Notices
James: Get a sense of what this rebase means. What are 5 things we will not change?
Jonny: Encourage community to come to this meeting and discuss. Cooperate toward developing a mission statement. Everything through consensus.
Drew: Determine what will go on during build out days.
Justin: Build out days could be a monthly thing. Maybe recurring.
Drew: If closure is needed, and there is money in the bank for space and operational changes. How will we show effective capitalizaton?
Justin: Smaller incremental changes. Test projects that can be rolled back. Baby rebase.
Drew: We should set deadlines, but closure no sooner than three months, perhaps 1-2 months of proposals
Justin: a project too far in the future becomes uncertain
Jonny: concerned about Blocking
Jonny: We should look at the rebase in terms of categories. Engage the community in brainstorming. Go to the list.
James: It would be nice to hear why people were/weren’t supportive of changes discussed in the past.
Justin: This should be on the wiki.
Drew: use the page Danny created.
James: Should we send the meeting notes to the event handlers list? Or perhaps put notes on the Rebase page, with major conclusions noted on the wiki.
James: We should discuss some specific ideas. Ex. Painting the walls, Redoing the Elevator, Replacing bad furniture, rebuilding the member shelves, work on the ceiling.
James: If we were to simply clean the space it would change it dramatically.
Dan: Blue lights in the bathroom... (facetious)
Jonny: There should be compelling reasons for these projects
Justin: That is what consensus is for, we won’t close the space unless needed.
Drew: (Refers to Danny’s “what would you do” statement on the Rebase page) We should still engage proposals that are ambitious.
Dan: (Danny’s previous concerns about NB being under existential threat) I am concerned about does this put us on the road to fascism?
Justin: The project being initially about bums in the space.
Dan: May I finish. The reasons for the proposal of this rebase idea have residue. We must aviod having an axe to grind. Avoid mixed motives, be genuine. Work on requesting excellence. Concerned as how to show support for the project without supporting an agenda.
Jonny: You are talking about the process. If people may not want to use the suggested template.
Justin: I am uncomfortable also. You don’t want to?..
Drew: ..that use of the template carries implicit support of the shutdown idea. How do we show that we are not committed to shutting down?
Jonny: This is NB. People will submit questions and comments in anyway they feel. Also we can develop the No change list. We won’t close NB without a compelling reason.
James: We need moderation, and an option to share ideas without discussion and no interruption.
Drew: Moderation and Stack taker.
Jonny: perhaps at the beginning of the meeting, presentations and then discussion.
James: It would be nice to present the things you wouldn’t change. What ARE some of the things you wouldn’t change?
Jonny: 5 things list. This should be finalized early. Use questions that draw out fresh faces.
Drew: could you throw out some examples? What wouldn’t you change? What would warrant closure? If NB HAD TO close, what would you do then?
Jonny: It should be goal oriented. We should make a rough draft of the things we wouldn’t change.
Douglas: We should avoid closure.
Justin: (not directed at anyone in particular) What would be the impact to you of closing NB? (J.C. arrives)
James: perhaps we can test this on J.C.
J.C.: I’m here because I am interested in seeing the space improve. I am behind the idea of large scale infrastructure improvements.
James: Is there anything you wouldn’t change? What makes you want to come?
J.C. I want to spend my time here productively and not waste time on drama.
Drew: Let’s get some processes established. Let’s get some things we have decided on here established for next week.
Jonny: There aren’t only 5 things. There are hundreds of things. This has to do with getting broader support from the community.
J.C.: We need to promote Excellence.
Drew: connect me on that.
Justin: I propose that we consens on having a moderator. (quick poll and comment)
[Moderator proposal CONSENSED. Jonny stands aside]
J.C.: Moderation can be handed off.
[Moderation transfers CONSENSED]
Drew: Jonny’s bullet points (reffering to what wouldn’t you change list) should be part of the meeting, but should not restrict proposals. Balance the what we would not change discussion. Engage ideas about what we want to do.
Jonny: Do not remove consensus. I am concerned about paranoia. This should be noted by the broader community.
James: I will not participate without using consensus.
Jonny: I think there should be consensus noted in an official document.
Drew: We will write opinons of for and against to bring to the meeting.
James: do we have something that we want to propose to the list? (discussion list)
J.C.: We need to make the format that we will disperse to the general community.
Justin: I will present proposals on the behalf of people that cannot come to the meeting.
Jonny: we shouldn’t use the term consensus.
Justin: we will only present projects that we Agree on.
J.C. Do we have anything to offer tonight.
Justin: Announce that we will communicate and compile the ideas. Justin will present for the absent.
Drew: Compile the four document we discussed and post them on the wiki.
J.C.: In pseudo-consensus, Some topics should be on the agenda. Let’s propose projects at one meeting and discuss them at the next. Also, is there a smaller scale project that we can test?
James: Do we want to talk about ideas?
Drew the process should be consensus based.
J.C.: In the post waste nexus meetings we go through a “check out” process where we each say a final thought. Shall we go around and say a final thought and an idea or change we would like to make? (agreements from the attendees)
Justin: Include everyone at the meetings that cannot attend. Meeting Setup: Proposal then discussion
Justin: Build a loft over the member shelves, add more storage above.
Justin: I also think we should allow same day issues.
Jonny: “Pick a Problem” discussions to focus meetings.
Justin: I propose that we discus Culture at the next meeting
[choice of culture topic CONSENSED]
Dan: this is a challenging meeting. I look forward to having more natural conversations in between.
Kevin: It is good to see a group. I will try to make it next Tuesday. My ideas: Volunteer shifts. People can volunteer for certain tasks.
Jarrod: For next week I would like to present some space layout changes. More gradients/changes regarding volume levels. Create more optons for people to find space comfortable to them. (Jarrod presents a printed map of how to change the layout) I’ve complied a list of all requested changes I can find and incorporated them into this printout.
James: I thought about moving the shop. Standing computers for Public Access. Adjust the layout of the vertical space. I would like our project to reflect that. Arrage the space to be more pleasant.
Drew: These are the things and ideas that I would like to se. Moving from evolutionary in design ideas. A permanent greeting desk with a big door button. Have a welcoming person at the desk. Also consider how the bike space can be protected. Discuss some standards regarding music in the space.
Justin: Setup a decimeter to have actual measurements of sound in the space to work off of.
Drew: Douglas and Jonny are good as people representing the desire not to change what is good about NB.
Mike: 1. Have you studied the discussion lists of other hackerspaces? 2. Note the location of NB. The quality of a place is determined by its location; in this case the Mission. (Mike provides and example of the waters surrounding Holland and how the affect the places there) Perhaps purchase a place in another location. A place where the flood is abated.
J.C. Perhaps we should have a moving discussion. I have another specific idea. Sensory Deprivation Tank.
(comments and suggestions of humorous consequences of installing such a device)