[Noisebridge-discuss] Fwd: how Noisebridge could improve
dharlette at gmail.com
Sat Apr 12 04:35:42 UTC 2014
Hey, remember that time when there was that guy who liked to hang out at NB
24/7, give tours, moderate meetings, & redshirt, but then it turned out he
was a sexual predator with a history of battering women who was living at
Noisebridge to evade the regulations about how far from a school registered
sex offenders are allowed to live?
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Christoph Maier
<christoph.maier at ieee.org>wrote:
> As much as I find that it complicates matters,
> you can devise rules, mission statemens [see
> https://noisebridge.net/wiki/File:Noisebridge_Mission_Statement.JPG for
> my stab at it],
> visions, etc. etc.
> all you want, but in the end, whether stuff works or doesn't depends on
> specific people and their idiosyncratic way of making stuff work.
> And those people change from time to time ... anything long-term at
> noisebridge is beyond my imagination.
> I can think of a bazillion reasons why what works with Frantisek doesn't
> work with anyone else.
> The alternative is that Law Enforcement (i.e. folks who like to enforce
> laws on others), or chaos.
> Well, some folks make Chaos AND things work :-P
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's a romantic idea, but in practicality it's a fragile arrangement.
>> Whatever you think of having people live in the space (for, against,
>> "it's complicated"), whether we are zoned for live-work or not, I'm
>> sure anyone reading this can think of a dozen different reasons why
>> reliance on a single person's motivations is not a long-term solution
>> for anything at Noisebridge.
>> Not that you were suggesting so, Christoph. I am just taking the
>> opportunity to make the point.
>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Christoph Maier
>> <christoph.maier at ieee.org> wrote:
>> > After running into Frantisek at Seoul Hackerspace, I imagine how
>> > as trusted squatter-in-residence, would improve both friendliness and
>> > security of a hackerspace. But some <expletive deleted> tore out half
>> > kitchen.
>> > On Apr 11, 2014 7:58 AM, "Naomi Most" <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Addendum:
>> >> Our lack of security can also be chalked up to a failure of
>> >> Oh, I know we've imagined things, but largely they have been along the
>> >> lines of doing one or two individual things, which really could not
>> >> work on their own because of the limitedness of their scope and/or the
>> >> unfeasibility of the resources (e.g. humans) needed to perpetuate
>> >> them.
>> >> We have never totally imagined the security of the space as a system.
>> >> Please don't take me to mean that security is hopeless. I mean mostly
>> >> to say that at Noisebridge it is Very Hard.
>> >> Larger post coming soon.
>> >> --Naomi
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss