[Noisebridge-discuss] My name is Al Sweigart, and I approve this message.
glen at glenjarvis.com
Tue Jan 18 08:00:18 PST 2011
Awesome post, Rachel :)
El Jan 18, 2011, a las 7:29 AM, rachel lyra hospodar <rachelyra at gmail.com> escribió:
> (Shameless email thread hijacking)
> I haven't been around nearly as long as Al, and don't have as many specific points of change for which I am interested in agitating, but I have some general similarities in my take on the elections. I have enjoyed finding and becoming more involved in this community. I am a do-first-ask-questions-later kind of gal, and my contributions to the community have been a healthy mix of helping others with their projects, working on my own cockamamie schemes, and running off at the mouth (sometimes following through) on how I think things could be improved.
> I am still not sure about how I feel about sitting on the board. Vote for me, or don't. I, like Al, intend to Do Some Things whether I am on the board or not. Mine may not involve rules so much as randomly painting things, breaking them, or fixing them, as I think circumstances warrant. I think that everyone up for the board has proven themselves to be do-ocratic leaders and I think we can foster leadership without creating Rulers.
> Also, I am voting for miloh and think everyone else should too. Not because of his charming face and winning personality but because I think he has given his heart to Noisebridge. He shows this regularly both with material support and do-ocratically, by showing up, teaching people, doing things, and helping others. Anyone who doesn't think so clearly must hate America.
> On Jan 17, 2011 11:07 PM, "Albert Sweigart" <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi, I'm Al. I'm running for a position on the board of directors at
> > Noisebridge. This is my "I am America and so can you" email where I
> > make outlandish promises and tell you that my campaign has the
> > momentum of a runaway train, why am I so popular.
> > Actually, I'm here to tell you a bunch of things that will make you
> > not vote for me.
> > I've been a member since a few months after we got the original 53C
> > space and have made a ton of contributions to NB over the years. It's
> > a fun place for me to hang out, meet people, and work on projects. But
> > I also see a lot of problems that keeps Noisebridge from attracting
> > members and being finacially sustainable. And I think it should be on
> > the board of directors to take a leadership role to actively try to
> > solve these problems.
> > That's the first reason to not vote for me: I don't think the board of
> > directors should be completely void of any responsibilities or
> > authority. While Noisebridge is a do-acracy, I think board director
> > should be an actual job and not just a title we made up to make
> > getting 501c3 status smoother.
> > Noisebridge's main problem is that there is the standard Tragedy of
> > the Commons: everyone has incentives to use Noisebridge's resources
> > but little incentive to maintain them. Because our social structure
> > gives everybody responsibility, often nobody has responsibility. And
> > it is incredibly easy for a small minority to exceedingly make use of
> > resources without contributing back or be forced to change their
> > behavior.
> > The second reason not to vote for me is that I think we could use
> > _some_ rules that _are_ enforced. Emphasis, of course, on "some".
> > Noisebridge's policy of not solving problems before they happen is
> > great and keeps our overhead low. But at the same time Noisebridge
> > seems to be incapable of solving even minor problems until they blow
> > up into a crisis (and bring about the dreaded "drama"). Nobody expects
> > to have a fire, but it isn't bureacratic micromanagement to get fire
> > insurance anyway.
> > Some problems we can ignore. Other problems we can ignore, but
> > shouldn't. I want to see what rules the majority of members would like
> > to see for Noisebridge. These are rules that would be simple and small
> > in scope, but are never even attempted to be put up for consensus
> > because everyone knows it would be blocked by some individual for one
> > reason or another. I think Noisebridge's "open" and "inclusive"
> > consensus process often excludes people from taking an active role in
> > Noisebridge in just this way, and stifles even a healthy level of
> > dissent. That's the third reason you shouldn't vote for me: even if we
> > don't get rid of consensus altogether for a majority voting system, I
> > think the way we conduct our consensus process needs to change. Right
> > now nobody gives the consensus process any credibility (just listen to
> > the sarcasm used when describing it at our weekly meetings) and we
> > subvert it anyway with "do-acracy". This is not how an organization as
> > large as ours should settle things.
> > The board elections should not be a popularity contest. This is why
> > I'm taking the (for us, unorthodox) step of sending out a "campaign"
> > email: I want people to know who they're voting for and what I want to
> > bring to the table.
> > And I think there are several things we need to do that would
> > currently be seen as unorthodox, but I am willing and capable of
> > directly confronting issues at Noisebridge. Unless you do absolutely
> > nothing as a board director, you will take criticism for any decision
> > or direction you want to steer the organization in. Whether the
> > "person living at Noisebridge" situation or the stacks of dirty
> > dishes, I don't mind taking on an issue, patiently listening to people
> > and explaining my position, and trying to be fair to all parties
> > involved. And as Noisebridge grows, there are going to be a lot more
> > parties and "be excellent" simply isn't going to be specific enough.
> > If I'm not what you want and this isn't the board you want, then don't
> > vote for me. If you think that Noisebridge is fine just the way it is,
> > then don't vote for me. If you think I'm personable or you're a
> > friend, don't vote for me just because of that. (Friends don't put
> > friends on the board of Noisebridge. I'm irked enough at Shannon for
> > nominating me in the first place.) Otherwise, this is my agenda and my
> > reasons for not ducking out of the election altogether. I'm not sure
> > on everything about what role the board of directors should take, but
> > I think it should be an active one. And I put my money where my mouth
> > is. Tuesday is the second $165 day that I've sponsored. I'm not only
> > involved, I'm committed.
> > We have a nestegg to pay rent now, but a lot of that is from large-sum
> > donations and also backpay from members who lapsed in their donations
> > for a while. Unless we want to live from crisis to crisis, Noisebridge
> > needs people to take on its difficulties and the board of directors
> > should be at the front of the line.
> > Feel free to email this thread with any questions. It's easy to get
> > misconceptions from an email like this, and I want to clear any of
> > them up. And pardon the vagueness and generalities in this email, I
> > didn't want it to be 500 pages.
> > -Al
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss