[Noisebridge-discuss] The door situation is not working.
kellan at grokbsd.com
Wed Apr 10 00:34:01 UTC 2013
I have a few thoughts on this. First I should state that I am one of
those people who donated during the pledge drive and I have been
teaching the Python class at NB since the beginning. First while I like
what your trying to do Danny with having the NB101 sessions. While I
love the idea of the class I would take issue with this being used as a
litmus test to give people access to the building.
In my own case I have been teaching at NB and contributing to the
community for quite some time now. I feel I have put in my time helping
make noisebridge a better place. Being forced to attend a 5 week class
just so I can contribute to my community after having done so for so
long is asking a little much.
Secondly in your fundraising email you stated that any donation of $10
or more would award you with a key to NB. While I donated out of NB
need, I am sure there are many that made the decision because of this
promise. To back out on your promise now after you received the funds
from us is not only unfair but bait and switch. Maybe this class could
be offered going forward.
Third - I would like to comment on the general idea of the door code. I
think the idea of giving door codes to paying members of the community
is general a good idea. We can simply deactivate their code when they
choose to stop paying membership.
Lastly - As one of the noisebridge instructors I have had times when the
door is broken or no one will answer it. I have had to call one of my
students and have them come and let me into the space so I could teach
our class. This is simply not ok. There needs to be a some trusted
people who have keys to NB.
Moving forward I think NB Should honor the requests door codes for those
who contributed. It is the right thing to do, but I think having a
better policy going forward would be perfectly ok.
Lastly in picking this process I want to tell you the reason it took me
so long to financially support noisebridge. The process is simply too
difficult. I have often looked at the membership page and thought about
becoming a full dues paying member. But the process is way too hard. I
can access the space without contributing but to contribute I have to
jump through a bunch of hoops. I am currently paying the 80 membership
fee, but I don't know if I can find two people who are actual members to
sponsor me. Everyone I have asked are not actual paying members. The
reason I bring this up is that when you are making this new door
code/key policy please remember my reasons for not contributing and
consider it when making the new policy. Please make one that is not too
much work. We want to be a welcoming and open place and making too many
rules in an anarchy to keep people out is just not the way to build a
On 9 Apr 2013, at 15:53, Danny O'Brien wrote:
> This is exactly what I wanted, including the bit at the end where you
> me off for envisaging some sort of mad rulemaking process.
> I am personally a bit sceptical about the doorcode-as-door-opener
> working, and still dumb on the NOISEBRIDGE PEOPLE bit, but I the bit I
> help with is getting out more codes to donors (so there's more people
> can both come in and let people in easily), and some sort of cultural
> acculturation thing.
> (Buried in this thread so as to not get people's hopes up too much)
> I am going to (haphazardly) start organizing the long mooted
> 101 session on Mondays at 6.00 (when it's not technoactivism mondays).
> travelling slightly more than usual in the next few weeks, so it will
> really be extra haphazard for a bit, but I will try to get other
> people to
> host while I am away.
> People attending 5 sessions will get a door code, a wiki account, a
> account, a PGP key signed by their fellow Noisebridigans, and a stamp
> their hackerspace passport showing that they are a Noisebridge Most
> Things you will learn will be:
> A Brief History of Techno-Anarchy: Free Culture, Hacker Culture, and
> Noisebridge Culture
> Noisebridge University -- Which Classes And Meetups Are For You?
> You Are So Cypherpunk -- Basic Digital Security at Noisebridge and the
> How to use the Wiki, and Other Eldritch Virtual Arts
> Creepus Expelliarmus! Role-playing Awkward Noisebridge Situations
> Discordianism, Consenso, and Tales of High Drama: Noisebridge Folk
> Safety Third! Basic safety and Third Aid
> Ask And Tell: The Dork's Guide To Excellent Social Interaction
> Rollercoaster Hardware Tour: The Lasercutter, Vinyl Cutter, and Other
> Using and Contributing to Free Software: Linux, Mozilla, Plan 9, and
> Noisebridge's Pony
> What do people think?
> any other suggestions?
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 2:39 AM, Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, 6 Apr 2013, Danny O'Brien wrote:
>>> Yeah, I think that the DOOR button is actually broken or
>>> 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
>>> 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
>> that i was going to do it and was met with approval, but i never got
>> 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
>> 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
>> 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
>> Here's where i initially suggested it:
>> Here are some people who liked it:
>> here's what YOU said about it on 17 January of this year:
>> I also announced it at a meeting, and everyone thought it was great:
>> 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.
>>> who mail doorcodes at noisebridge.net (not a real email address)?
>>> 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
>> same. Someone should create the email address doorcodes at noisebridge
>> 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
>> 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
>> codes out from the people who help make noisebridge happen, and
>> 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
>> an annoying noise. I want to adjust it so that when it is rung, a
>> begins blinking inside the space (near the door) and the "doorbell"
>> is muted to a lower volume when pressed, until either the electric
>> opens the door or a few minutes expire.
>> If someone uses their code to open the door for someone else I
>> they will make sure the person they let in belongs at noisebridge.
>> least more so than with the current setup where anyone can just push
>> door button.
>> 3) Keys still work. DOOR button will still work.
>> the keys have always worked and will continue to work. The DOOR
>> has been disabled in favour of using codes, either at the keypad near
>> 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
>> valves, the ones we have keep getting stuck open.
>> Incidentally, I asked Jake if I could give door codes to everyone who
>>> 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
>> 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
>> things if their behavior ever descends toward sleeping in the space
>> other unpleasantries. It's a low bar i'm setting, but it's better
>> 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)
>>> out ways of getting keys or codes, or whatever.
>> I think it's great that people come to visit. I look forward to the
>> when MORE NOISEBRIDGE PEOPLE hang out at noisebridge, having a good
>> rather than being repelled by its occupation by people from "the
>> When MORE NOISEBRIDGE PEOPLE hang out at noisebridge, visitors
>> ringing the
>> doorbell will NOT be ignored but instead NOISEBRIDGE PEOPLE will rush
>> the camera and intercom to see who is there, and welcome them in with
>> proper introduction. If whoever is there can't be bothered to say
>> through the intercom, or is recognized by one of the several
>> PEOPLE as a sleeper or stealer or just known to be not interesting
>> to buzz in, those people will talk about it and perhaps tell the
>> 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
>>> check out people. But I agree that locking new people out is not a
>>> side-effect of trying to encourage this.
>> If there is nobody at noisebridge with a code willing to let new
>> in, or willing to go down the steps to let people in, then it's not a
>> time for those people to get a good impression of noisebridge, don't
>> agree? I would rather they fail to enter at 2am on a friday night
>> instead come back saturday afternoon when hackers are up and hanging
>> 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
>> 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
>>> from coming in, based on how grumpy at inconveniences people are
>>> We should maximise the convienience for new people *and* for people
>>> inside. Punishing either of these people to handle bad people seems
>>> 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
>> likely because it's 2AM and they don't want anyone without a code
>> in, it's better to soften the sound of the doorbell and supplement it
>> 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
>> switch (which I did not install but i did label) and forget to flip
>> 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
>>> regular or second-time visitors, not newcomers.
>> I agree that people who abuse noisebridge have usually been there a
>> times before, but I also think that those people tend to NOT have a
>> 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
>>> already happen, but would be fixed by any of the variants of the
>>> you're proposing?
>> I have already written too many times the same post about how bad it
>> be if you tried to put a lock at the top of the steps. By the time
>> 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
>> the next person coming up the stairs has to get in, and then they
>> Or they will just learn to take up the elevator instead, further
>> away the last scraps of rust holding that thing together. I honestly
>> 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
>> them out is at the sidewalk. I am not going to argue this point
>> 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
>>> only one, if only because you regularly have to write emails like
>>> to people who don't get what's going on.
>> I don't have a system. Noisebridge has a system, with various parts.
>> 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
>> accusing me of being a secret holder.
>> I would absolutely love you to just write out the whole thing,
>>> and once and for all, and let everyone critique and improve the
>> I don't know what you want me to write out. 2169 mission has a metal
>> keeping people out from the street. You can open it with a key, or a
>> card, or you can activate an electrical solenoid by triggering a
>> called minotaur.
>> you can cause minotaur to open the gate either by typing a valid code
>> 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
>> 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.
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss