[Noisebridge-discuss] amendments to membership proposal - associate members and 24/7 hours

Romy Snowyla romy at snowyla.com
Tue Oct 22 15:26:02 UTC 2013


I've gone to Noisebridge after 11 and I love the new policy. I'm not a member but I was accompanied by a member. 

The vibe is much more conducive to hacking / you get a ton less sketchy behavior going on/ and it's actually wonderful to be able to hack in peace. 



Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 21, 2013, at 9:17 PM, Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:
> 
> Currently, between 23:00 and 10:00 only Members and persons with an application signed by two Members are allowed to be in the space without a sponsor present.  Anyone else can be asked to leave.
> 
> After this proposal, at all times only a Regular Member, an Associate Member, or a person with an application signed by two Members can be in the space without a sponsor present.  Only Members and Associate Members can sponsor people (or sign applications), and only while they are present.
> 
> Anyone else coming to the space will be the guest of one of the above, however informally.  When guests come in the door, they will be greeted by a Member of some level, who will introduce themselves and invite the guest to come to them or use their name if any issues arise.
> 
> If all the members are leaving, and the only people who would remain are guests, the members should ask the guests to leave until more members show up who will hopefully be open to sponsoring those people to be present.
> 
> Sponsoring guests is a simple matter of saying "i am willing to act as a docent for that particular person, and I will help solve any problems that arise around that person, including mediation or asking them to leave if necessary".  It does not mean you have to know the person or even like them, only that you are willing to be their connection to the space.
> 
> If members are leaving in the evening, as a group, which happens often, they will ask around to see if other members are present, and make sure that the remaining members are comfortable with whichever guests are present.  If there are guests who are not wanted by the members who are remaining, those members and the ones leaving will team up to politely ask that those guests come back another time when the space is more open to their presence (or to a meeting where they can meet more members)
> 
> What is happening now is that at 23:00 every night, most guests are asked to leave without having ever been explained the process of sponsoring. This is because they came in before 23:00 and the rules were suspended (a practice I propose to end) and so they are suddenly faced with a situation they were not informed about.  I hope that in the future, when the time comes for members to leave, there will be a smooth handoff of the excellent guest hackers to the members who are remaining (or just showing up) so that the hacking can continue uninterrupted.
> 
> -jake
> 
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2013, Liz Henry wrote:
>> 
>> Hmmm. What happens if all the members leave, for example in the evening? Does that ever happen?
>> - Liz
>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:
>>      Kevin,
>> 
>>      My goal is to remove the event of 23:00 being "kick people out" time. Instead, my goal is to make every moment a time when people coming to
>>      noisebridge get a proper introduction, and a connection to a Member of noisebridge.  As long as that happens, people can be in the space any
>>      time.  They just need to have someone who is a Member in the space say that they're vouched for.
>> 
>>      Having people fill out a form does nothing by itself.  As the proposal, which passed, is worded, the application needs signatures of at least
>>      two Members of noisebridge in order for the applicant to be entitled to the space in the "after hours" without a live sponsor.
>> 
>>      If you are a member, you are welcome to personally vouch for anyone you see in the space.  When they are asked (for example by Monad) if they
>>      have a sponsor, they will mention you, and if you are present, Monad can talk to you if he has any concerns about them.  It is a simple
>>      solution.
>> 
>>      If you are not a member, perhaps it is because of the financial requirements of being a Member, and this week's proposal will help by
>>      creating Associate Members who can host guests (and sign applications) while not being required to make financial contributions.  You should
>>      become an Associate Member so you can help people feel welcome at Noisebridge.
>> 
>>      My hope is that by removing the special time period, we will embrace this new system of excellence at all times, so that the only time people
>>      will be asked to leave is if they are somehow detracting from the space and there is no Member present who wants to stick up for them.
>> 
>>      -jake
>> 
>>      Kevin wrote:
>> 
>>      I was on docent shift last night. I asked one fella I found drinking
>>      beer in the stairway to leave. Two folks filed membership applications
>>      (under the "vouched for" section of the binder), and remained at
>>      Noisebridge after 23:00. I recognized both people as having been coming
>>      to NB for several months, and neither had heard of the new policy. All
>>      told, when I left there were three or four active hackers in the space.
>> 
>>      On the way out, Monad commented that one day Noisebridge will be
>>      welcoming to activists again. Thinking of Cypherpunks, open-source
>>      hackers/contributers, freedom on the web, freedom of information, etc...
>>      This resonated with me, and I will consider further the impact of
>>      proposals such as this in these terms. Will limiting access to NB
>>      attract activists? Will the proposal reduce disruption, disturbance,
>>      theft to facilitate hacking? Are there better ways for NB to be more
>>      welcoming?
>> 
>>      At the meeting where this proposal was consensed, John and I both
>>      strongly stood aside. As such, I have been steering many to file
>>      sponsorship paperwork to avoid being asked to leave. One person I've
>>      spoken with is adverse to filing any paperwork at all, and has not been
>>      at NB form 23:00-10:00. As regards the bug last night, that's my failure
>>      for not introducing myself and the membership binder to everyone that
>>      came in the door. I'm not convinced that extending the outage time will
>>      bring more excellent hackers to NB.
>> 
>>      --Kevin
>> 
>>      On 10/21/2013 05:26 PM, John Ellis wrote:
>>      HI Jake,
>> 
>>      I didn't think this original proposal was a good idea. Problems like
>>      you mention below, with genuine hackers being asked to leave, are
>>      bound to happen at various times.
>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Jake <jake at spaz.org
>> <mailto:jake at spaz.org>> wrote:
>>     tl;dr at the end of this post is the amended consensus item for
>>     this week
>>     I just found out that an excellen
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>> --
>> Liz Henry
>> lizhenry at gmail.com
>> "Electric ladies will you sleep or will you preach?" -- Janelle Monae
>> "Without models, it's hard to work; without a context, difficult to
>> evaluate; without peers, nearly impossible to speak." -- Joanna Russ


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list