[Noisebridge-discuss] proposal to improve latest membership proposal
terminationshok at gmail.com
Mon Nov 4 06:54:10 UTC 2013
Please do this as a trial. The last item ended up not working out as
intended. This item and the previous one was not and still is not on the
wiki. Some members are not fully comfortable with the proposal. I do like
the wording on the new one. Doing it as a trial will allow us to continue
to change the wording and make it better without fear of creating long term
policies with effects that nobody intended. It looks like nothing really
changes except it becomes easier to ask non-members to leave.
Thanks for your work on this, and I think this is going to be a positive
change while respecting the open nature of the space.
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:
> At the end of this post is the text of my proposal for the 2013 November
> 5th meeting.
> Last week Noisebridge consensed on an amendment to the access policy, with
> wording that was based on a proposal I had made.
> Unfortunately I was not at the meeting when this was consensed, but if I
> was I would have questioned the reason for some of the changes.
> Specifically, I proposed "the policy of Noisebridge as a space open only
> to Members and their guests shall be changed to 24 hours a day instead of
> 23:00 to 10:00. This means that at any time, a person who is without a live
> sponsor in the space can be told that if they cannot find a new live
> sponsor promptly they should pack up and come back another time, perhaps
> Tuesday night."
> What was consensed was "Noisebridge's space shall be open only to members
> and associate members at any time. A member or associate member may at any
> time invite a person into Noisebridge and host that person at Noisebridge
> as long as that member or associate member remains at Noisebridge. No other
> person shall be permitted at Noisebridge at any other time."
> I believe that this is a significant difference and I propose we change it
> back to what I had recommended. Too many people have interpreted the words
> very strictly and have misunderstood the intent behind the policy.
> Since I wasn't at the meeting I don't know why the change was made. My
> guess is that people were trying to understand the intent behind the words
> and they got it wrong. I never thought noisebridge should automatically
> eject anyone, at 11PM or ever.
> I just think we should make it clear to people that they are expected to
> get to know at least one member of the space if they want to use it, and
> that if they don't, they might be asked to leave if no member wants them to
> the proposal should be worded as follows:
> What was consensed as
> "Noisebridge's space shall be open only to members and associate members
> at any time. A member or associate member may at any time invite a person
> into Noisebridge and host that person at Noisebridge as long as that
> member or associate member remains at Noisebridge. No other person shall
> be permitted at Noisebridge at any other time."
> should be changed to
> "Noisebridge is open to Members, Associate Members, and guests sponsored
> by same, at all times. Any person who is not one of the above may be
> asked to leave if no Member or Associate Member present wishes to sponsor
> them at that time, with no other justification being necessary.
> People coming to Noisebridge who don't know anyone should be introduced
> to members who are present so that sponsorship can occur if members
> present choose to do so at that time. Noisebridge should present itself
> as "open to public visitors and guests as often as possible"
> If you have suggested amendments to this wording please say so now so we
> can begin the discussion.
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss