[Noisebridge-discuss] Added proposal to current consensus items
asweigart at gmail.com
Wed Dec 11 18:29:13 UTC 2013
This seems similar to the "invalidate the associates member" item from a
couple weeks ago, except it puts the expiration date in the future.
Wouldn't it be more prudent to simply revisit the topic at that date to see
if people's feelings have changed at that point in time?
On a personal note: The two-tiered member structure does make me
uncomfortable. Associate members were created because it's so hard to
become a capital-m member (ugg, a term I dislike), but it's hard to become
a Member because it grants that person the Nuclear Option of blocking. I
think if we address that, then the member issue gets solved as well.
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:10 AM, bfb <bfb at riseup.net> wrote:
> I added a line to the text to clarify. The intent is to create a trial
> period where Noisebridge can hack, experiment and tweak, in good faith, the
> associate member consensus made on 10-29-2013.
> If no second consensus can be reached in February, the associate member
> role goes away, member dues are reinstated, and Noisebridge is open to the
> public 24/7.
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Gregory Dillon
> Date:12/10/2013 17:59 (GMT-08:00)
> To: Kevin Schiesser
> Cc: NoiseBridge Discuss
> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Added proposal to current consensus
> Could you clarify what this means? Its seems well intended, convoluted
> and imprecise. Does it suggest retroactively doing something in the
> future? Just what is the "original consensus" I could guess, but its not
> clear. What is a mutation? I don't want to be a mutation. Isn't $date
> + 90 before Feb 4, and if so what happens when that bell rings?, do the
> Associate Members transform into Capital M members or are they outsiders?
> I can see the point of wanting to review a certain consensus item, but I
> can't make out what this would do.
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Kevin Schiesser <bfb at riseup.net> wrote:
>> "Noisebridge should attach an expiration period of 90 days, beginning
>> October 29, 2013, to the consensus decision to create an Associate
>> Member role<https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Meeting_Notes_2013_10_29#Proposal_to_create_an_Associate_Member_role_and_limit_access_to_Noisebridge_24.2F7_to_Member.2C_Associate_Member_and_thoes_hosted_by_M_and_AM>.
>> All subsequent mutations of the original consensus should be brought for a
>> second consensus, beginning February 4, 2014. "
>> See https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Current_Consensus_Items for details.
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> Let's stay in touch. Greg
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss