[Noisebridge-discuss] misogynist loser visiting noisebridge
asweigart at gmail.com
Mon Dec 23 21:50:09 UTC 2013
Theoretically, associate members do have access to the membership shelves.
The tarp was basically to keep people in general from poking around in the
member shelves area or confuse it with hack shelves (though obviously that
doesn't stop some people), and the camera was Jake's own initiative.
Also, there's always been a shortage of member shelves. Most people would
be okay halving their shelf space to give others shelves. But a lot of the
shelves I think have been plain forgotten about. The thing is, it's really
hard to tell which is which. I don't think the name labels on shelves are
all accurate and up-to-date. The laissez-faire nature of the members area
has introduced a lot of problems over time.
This was one of the things my locker proposal tried to solve: making sure
that the space had storage resources that were available, offered a degree
of security, and explicitly maintained by a person rather than a group
diffusion of responsibility.
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Danny O'Brien <danny at spesh.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Johny Radio <johnyradio at gmail.com>
> > On 12/23/2013 12:43:54 PM, "Danny O'Brien" <danny at spesh.com> wrote:
> >> The idea is that the hacker shelves are where you should be able to
> >> put projects that you want to work on for a while.
> > Thank you Noisebridge, every hacker needs that.
> >> It was mooted at some point that it should just be for members
> > then there is a failure of communication, culture, and policy, because
> in my
> > 3 yrs coming to NB, i have ONLY heard that member shelves are for members
> > only, and i cannot find any docs stating otherwise.
> The best way to understand this is to ask yourself how many rules does
> Noisebridge have? If someone asserts that you can or can't do
> something at Noisebridge (until recently), the general answer was
> there's no *rule* stopping you, but you should try and think about
> what people's reactions would be.
> >> there was disagreement about whether members should really have any
> >> particular privileges.
> > seems that disagreement was never resolved, and unresolved agreements
> > produce confusion and conflict. Seems there's a lot of that at nb. Maybe
> > it's time nb resolves its internal disagreements.
> A disagreement doesn't mean that there isn't a particular agreement in
> place. You're probably right that complexities should be communicated,
> but, again, there is an Anciente Preference for the complex and subtle
> over the simple rule.
> The tarps and so forth are, I think, mainly a result of Rayc having
> moved the entire hacker shelves one night in a fit of enthusiasm, and
> then having to cope with the criticisms of that action. The camera is
> there because Jake put it there, I think. Jake keeps stuff on the
> hacker shelves, and he's not a member. There's a strong cultural
> pressure on Noisebridge not to have cameras, but that appears to be
> changing. How confusing it all is!
> > -jr
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss