[Noisebridge-discuss] The door situation is not working.

Jake jake at spaz.org
Mon Apr 8 07:57:04 UTC 2013


We need to figure out what part of the system is broken.

Does the door still open when a valid code is typed into the keypad?

Are you talking about the doorbell noise?  There is a switch on the 
upstairs intercom which turns the doorbell noise on and off.  I labeled 
it.

But to be sure, the door opening solenoid has had problems in the past.

-jake

On Sun, 7 Apr 2013, Mitch Altman wrote:

> I should have written about this last Monday (but, sorry -- I forgot). 
> The door buzz-in system is broken.  It worked fine last Monday 
> afternoon, but stopped working by Monday evening.  No one during that 
> time tampered with it, as far as I know.  But after we determined that 
> it wasn't working, someone went down to the gate and opened up the 
> mechanism, and closed it up again, and that made it function again for a 
> few DOOR presses.  But, then it stopped working again.
>
> Mitch.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 02:39:10 -0700
>> From: jake at spaz.org
>> To: danny at spesh.com
>> CC: i at s.ai; noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] The door situation is not working.
>>
>> On Sat, 6 Apr 2013, Danny O'Brien wrote:
>>> Yeah, I think that the DOOR button is actually broken or *something*,
>>> and that's what's annoying people right now.
>>> Jake you know the door system better than anyone at this point -- is
>>> there something that could be (sporadically or not) preventing the DOOR
>>> button from working?
>>
>> I am going to assume someone disabled it. They should have made an
>> announcement or something on the list. I made announcements several times
>> that i was going to do it and was met with approval, but i never got
>> around to it. I think it's a good idea and we should get used to it.
>>
>>> There seems to be a bunch of things like timers hanging off the door
>>> system downstairs. Could they be causing problems?
>>
>> the stuff downstairs has nothing to do with the door button. There is a
>> conventional 24-hour light timer for the lights that are supposed to
>> illuminate people outside the gate at night (so we can see them on the
>> camera) and a 12v power adaptor for the camera. There is also a 12v
>> adaptor that goes nowhere, for the hard drive that used to be there and is
>> gone now. The DOOR button wiring and buzzer wiring is all put away like
>> it was before Noisebridge arrived.
>>
>>> Is there anyway we can simplify what we already have without causing
>>> problems to your future plans?
>>
>> This is not about my plans. Noisebridge is a collective activity and we
>> should discuss things together. Anyone interested in working on
>> infrastructure should communicate with other people who are interested for
>> maximum effect. I can try to answer any questions if they are asked of
>> me.
>>
>>> Asked what? I know I'm probably being stupid, but after all these months
>>
>> Here's where i initially suggested it:
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2013-January/034216.html
>>
>> Here are some people who liked it:
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2013-January/034217.html
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2013-January/034221.html
>>
>> here's what YOU said about it on 17 January of this year:
>>
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2013-January/034236.html
>>
>> I also announced it at a meeting, and everyone thought it was great:
>>
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Meeting_Notes_2013_02_19
>>
>>> I'm sure not entirely sure what the plan is. I *think* it's this:
>>>
>>> 1) Door code to get in. Door code available to... who? Not sure. People
>>> who mail doorcodes at noisebridge.net (not a real email address)? People
>>> who come to Meeting? Probably the latter.
>>
>> I have been providing codes to people who email me and tell me enough
>> about themselves that I think they belong at noisebridge. You can do the
>> same. Someone should create the email address doorcodes at noisebridge so
>> that myself and others with the ability to add codes can share the labor
>> of giving people codes. I don't want a million people emailing me at my
>> private email address for codes. We should share the work.
>>
>> But yes, some infrastructure for code distribution would be appropriate.
>>
>> I do NOT think we should make it so that anyone with a code can just
>> create more codes. That is not reasonable. We need to have a flow of
>> codes out from the people who help make noisebridge happen, and maintain
>> control of that flow of access.
>>
>>> 2) Buzzer works to let people in, but you have to either go and press
>>> the DOOR button or... type a code? Typing a code means that you've
>>> agreed to greet people?
>>
>> I don't know what you mean my buzzer. There is a "doorbell" which makes
>> an annoying noise. I want to adjust it so that when it is rung, a light
>> begins blinking inside the space (near the door) and the "doorbell" sound
>> is muted to a lower volume when pressed, until either the electric latch
>> opens the door or a few minutes expire.
>>
>> If someone uses their code to open the door for someone else I presume
>> they will make sure the person they let in belongs at noisebridge. At
>> least more so than with the current setup where anyone can just push the
>> door button.
>>
>>> 3) Keys still work. DOOR button will still work.
>>
>> the keys have always worked and will continue to work. The DOOR button
>> has been disabled in favour of using codes, either at the keypad near the
>> intercom or on ones Android app, or from a webpage on ones' PC.
>>
>>> Does that sound right? Are there extra stages in the future?
>>
>> the flamethrowers are being cobbled together but we need bigger solenoid
>> valves, the ones we have keep getting stuck open.
>>
>>> Incidentally, I asked Jake if I could give door codes to everyone who is
>>> subscribing to Pay Noisebridge. He said yes -- I think it's a good idea.
>>> Do other people think that's a good idea?
>>
>> I think that if people can operate email and have made a commitment to
>> support noisebridge to the tune of $10 per month they should definitely be
>> able to have a code. Those people are likely capable of a reasonable
>> conversation and are presumably willing to come to a meeting to discuss
>> things if their behavior ever descends toward sleeping in the space or
>> other unpleasantries. It's a low bar i'm setting, but it's better than
>> propping the door open, which is effectively what we've been doing.
>>
>>> Yeah, but the problem is that lots of people like coming to visit us.
>>> Almost none of them are bad people. The bad people will (and have)
>>> worked out ways of getting keys or codes, or whatever.
>>
>> I think it's great that people come to visit. I look forward to the day
>> when MORE NOISEBRIDGE PEOPLE hang out at noisebridge, having a good time,
>> rather than being repelled by its occupation by people from "the street".
>>
>> When MORE NOISEBRIDGE PEOPLE hang out at noisebridge, visitors ringing the
>> doorbell will NOT be ignored but instead NOISEBRIDGE PEOPLE will rush to
>> the camera and intercom to see who is there, and welcome them in with a
>> proper introduction. If whoever is there can't be bothered to say hello
>> through the intercom, or is recognized by one of the several NOISEBRIDGE
>> PEOPLE as a sleeper or stealer or just known to be not interesting enough
>> to buzz in, those people will talk about it and perhaps tell the person
>> that Noisebridge isn't here right now so they can't come in.
>>
>>> The accepted cultural fix for this is to encourage people to greet and
>>> check out people. But I agree that locking new people out is not a great
>>> side-effect of trying to encourage this.
>>
>> If there is nobody at noisebridge with a code willing to let new people
>> in, or willing to go down the steps to let people in, then it's not a good
>> time for those people to get a good impression of noisebridge, don't you
>> agree? I would rather they fail to enter at 2am on a friday night and
>> instead come back saturday afternoon when hackers are up and hanging out
>> and eager to give them a tour. Also if those people get on IRC someone
>> can remotely let them in if they have a code.
>>
>> the fact is, our extreme open-door policy has allowed too many people
>> whose habits and presence discourages our core membership demographic from
>> wanting to be at noisebridge. That is a problem worth solving.
>>
>>>> 5. There is a switch on the intercom to turn off the doorbell, if it
>>>> is annoying you and you don't feel like answering the door. Please
>>>> turn it back on when you leave.
>>>
>>> I don't think anyone understands all of those switches. I don't.
>>
>> there is only one switch and it is very clearly labeled. In english!
>>
>>>> 6. I will be adding an automatic mute for the doorbell, which turns
>>>> on a blinking light over the door and reduces the volume of the
>>>> doorbell until someone buzzes the door or a few minutes pass. Or
>>>> you could do it.
>>>
>>> Why is this a good idea? This just seems to be stopping people who buzz
>>> from coming in, based on how grumpy at inconveniences people are inside.
>>> We should maximise the convienience for new people *and* for people
>>> inside. Punishing either of these people to handle bad people seems to
>>> be the wrong incentive system.
>>
>> If the people in the space are not letting people in who are outside,
>> either because they don't have a code or because they are grumpy, or more
>> likely because it's 2AM and they don't want anyone without a code coming
>> in, it's better to soften the sound of the doorbell and supplement it with
>> a gently blinking reminder light for a few minutes don't you think?
>>
>> Otherwise people in the space are more likely to flip the DOORBELL SILENT
>> switch (which I did not install but i did label) and forget to flip it
>> back. I think gentle softening of the doorbell for a few minutes when
>> it's clearly being ignored is a good idea.
>>
>>> I'm pretty sure that a large number of what problems we have come from
>>> regular or second-time visitors, not newcomers.
>>
>> I agree that people who abuse noisebridge have usually been there a few
>> times before, but I also think that those people tend to NOT have a code.
>> And part of the reason they don't have a code is because if they tried to
>> get one, which they wouldn't bother trying, they would be refused.
>>
>>>> In short, if someone is in the building they are already our
>>>> (Noisebridge's) responsibility.
>>>
>>> I follow the mailing list, and I still don't really understand this
>>> either. What are the scenarios where someone gets buzzed in, but we
>>> don't let them in through the door, thus causing them to wander the
>>> building, terrifying the residents? Under what situations would this not
>>> already happen, but would be fixed by any of the variants of the system
>>> you're proposing?
>>
>> I have already written too many times the same post about how bad it would
>> be if you tried to put a lock at the top of the steps. By the time
>> someone ascends the steps and is standing on the other side of the door
>> looking at you, if you refuse to let them in you're going to just piss
>> them off until the next person coming up the stairs has to get in, and
>> then they assault you.
>>
>> Or they will just learn to take up the elevator instead, further wearing
>> away the last scraps of rust holding that thing together. I honestly
>> think this issue is so absurd and dead that I don't want to even address
>> it anymore and I would almost rather see what happens if people try it.
>>
>> If people are not welcome inside noisebridge, the proper place to lock
>> them out is at the sidewalk. I am not going to argue this point anymore.
>>
>>> I know you talk a lot about your system, Jake, but I *really* don't
>>> understand it. Everytime you explain it to me, I just have more
>>> questions. And I know it's annoying for you, but I don't think I'm the
>>> only one, if only because you regularly have to write emails like this
>>> to people who don't get what's going on.
>>
>> I don't have a system. Noisebridge has a system, with various parts.
>> Most of it is well documented. I know about much of it. If you have a
>> particular question for me just ask it instead of writing a big paragraph
>> accusing me of being a secret holder.
>>
>>> I would absolutely love you to just write out the whole thing, finally
>>> and once and for all, and let everyone critique and improve the plan.
>>
>> I don't know what you want me to write out. 2169 mission has a metal gate
>> keeping people out from the street. You can open it with a key, or a BART
>> card, or you can activate an electrical solenoid by triggering a computer
>> called minotaur.
>>
>> you can cause minotaur to open the gate either by typing a valid code into
>> the payphone outside the gate, or into a keypad upstairs above the
>> intercom. Or you can put a code into the android app. Or there's a
>> webpage i think. There is a DOOR button but it apparently doesn't work
>> anymore, which I think is good.
>>
>> i don't understand why you're suddenly acting like noisebridge operates on
>> a deterministic systemized rulemaking process and you're demanding that I
>> explain to you how it works.
>>
>> -jake
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list