[Noisebridge-discuss] Drama

David Rorex drorex at gmail.com
Fri May 4 15:49:06 PDT 2012


I wouldn't say AMT is a private club, to my knowledge up to this point
nobody who wanted to visit has ever been turned away, and nobody who wanted
to become a member has ever been rejected. However the policy is such that
non-members are only allowed inside when members are around, and the only
way to get a key is to become a member. Also we specifically state that all
of our events are open to the public and non members are welcome. Our
mission statement is specifically to focus on hacking/making/building/
arting, and not consensus/anarchy/extreme inclusion/politics/whatever.


On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:11 PM, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:

>
>    The circumstance at 83c was similar to 2169: a door
> that is locked and people inside who pretty much let
> in anyone who knocked.
>    As I understand things, The discussions people had
> in the planning phase included an acknowledgement of a
> publicly open place and its foreseeable problems.
>    Note that AMTD is pretty much a private club, and
> deliberately so to test a model different from
> Noisebridge's.
>
>
>
> On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 13:25 -0700, Martin Bogomolni wrote:
> > Jim,
> >
> > Originally, that was _not_ the case.   There was a door, and to get in
> > you needed a key for that door.   The key was given to you _after_ you
> > had petitioned for membership in The Book, and consensus was achieved
> > for your induction.
> >
> > You could, of course, let someone in if you had a key... and if you
> > knocked on the door, if someone let you into the shop, you were
> > responsible for having let them in.   There was no "open door"
> > policy.. the lock was locked.
> >
> > We have a very permeable "door" at the moment, and there are
> > non-keyholders inside the space who will let other non-keyholders in.
> >  Yes, this was -possible- at the old 83c space, but it generally
> > wasn't an issue since it was a very small space and a fairly tight
> > community.
> >
> > -M
> >
> > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:06 PM, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >    My understanding is that the original concept
> > > of Noisebridge was to be open to the public.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20120504/65fe2294/attachment.htm 


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list