[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Bylaws

Naomi Most pnaomi at gmail.com
Mon Apr 7 23:05:33 UTC 2014


There is no "yes or no" question implied here:

> So, I'm of the mindset that the Noisebridge bylaws are not suggestions, but rules that cannot be ignored or are somehow optional. Anyone else like to make a public record if they feel the same way or the opposite?

You were asking if people "feel the same way or the opposite".  I replied:

> "I am not for changing the bylaws, at all.  Don't see any need to."

How does this leave wiggle room?

Whatever.

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
> Nah, it's just that it's a really simple question but your lengthy answer
> didn't give a straight yes or no. And the other times I've asked you've also
> dodged it. Even your current answer of "Did I ever imply otherwise?" leaves
> wiggle room for you to later say, "I never said we had to follow the
> bylaws."
>
> Mostly I worry that you make up your own rules for whatever is convenient.
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Did I ever imply otherwise?
>>
>> You're clearly setting up for something I fear won't pan out for you
>> the way you're hoping...
>>
>> --Naomi
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > So Naomi, does that mean you agree that the Noisebridge bylaws can't be
>> > ignored?
>> >
>> > On Apr 6, 2014 6:15 PM, "Naomi Gmail" <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Good constructive question.
>> >>
>> >> If we can't agree on the bylaws as a firm basis, then we have no
>> >> foundation at all, and nothing we do in writing or at meetings will
>> >> help to
>> >> bring this disparate community together.
>> >>
>> >> I am not for changing the bylaws, at all.  Don't see any need to.
>> >>
>> >> Of possible relevance:
>> >>
>> >> In proposing a rewrite -- or better stated, a "renewal"-- of a Mission
>> >> Statement, it wasn't my intention to imply a rewrite to the bylaws.
>> >> Only a
>> >> rewriting (or not!) of what appears on the wiki as the explanation of
>> >> what
>> >> Noisebridge "does" and why, and more importantly, a process of coming
>> >> to the
>> >> agreement that helps the community understand itself better.
>> >>
>> >> --Naomi
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > On Apr 6, 2014, at 4:47 PM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > So, I'm of the mindset that the Noisebridge bylaws are not
>> >> > suggestions,
>> >> > but rules that cannot be ignored or are somehow optional. Anyone else
>> >> > like
>> >> > to make a public record if they feel the same way or the opposite?
>> >> >
>> >> > -Al
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> >> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> >> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Naomi Theora Most
>> naomi at nthmost.com
>> +1-415-728-7490
>>
>> skype: nthmost
>>
>> http://twitter.com/nthmost
>
>



-- 
Naomi Theora Most
naomi at nthmost.com
+1-415-728-7490

skype: nthmost

http://twitter.com/nthmost


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list