[Noisebridge-discuss] Consensus proposal: renaming member categories
cjtang1 at asu.edu
Mon Dec 9 18:02:50 UTC 2013
I mean, we could call it a Panopticon, considering foucualt would agree.
On 9 December 2013 09:25, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
> We get it. You don't like Tom. But stop trying to frame all of his
> Noisebridge policy suggestions as trolling or somehow insincere. Renaming
> the membership is an actual consensus proposal, and the "high cabal" part
> was clearly a joke. If you look on the consensus page, it says "Noisebridge
> Council". (Personal note: yeah, I think we could come up with a better name
> than council. And I'm fine with the current names.)
> Please quit purposefully misinterpreting what other people say.
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Leif Ryge <leif at synthesize.us> wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 06:44:52PM -0800, Tom Lowenthal wrote:
>> > I have proposed the following on the [upcoming consensus items] page:
>> > > Renaming the category “Noisebridge Members” to the “Noisebridge
>> Council”, and
>> > > renaming the category “Associate Members” to “Noisebridge Members”.
>> This change
>> > > extends not only to our operations, but also to our bylaws, so that
>> the effect is only
>> > > a change of name but does not change the rights or privileges of any
>> person or
>> > > category of people.
>> > If this topic is of interest to you, I invite you to come discuss it
>> > on Tuesday. I'm not a huge fan of the string “Noisebridge Council”,
>> > and would be interested in other options. “Noisebridge High Cabal”,
>> > perhaps?
>> Please quit trolling Noisebridge.
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss