[Noisebridge-discuss] "Banning" discussion tonight

Ronald Cotoni setient at gmail.com
Wed Feb 26 02:06:46 UTC 2014


Lee was aware and Lee chose for a long time to not come to meetings or get
someone else to proxy block.  I suggest you get a deeper understanding of
how consensus works and why it is the way it is.   It was to give him time,
which he ignored sadly and has to deal with the consequences now.
On Feb 25, 2014 6:00 PM, "Charles Tang" <cjtang1 at asu.edu> wrote:

> The second person who answers by come to a meeting.
>
> These answers are fluid, which is the reason why Johnny asked for
> clarification on GitHub.
>
> We need a better understanding and conceptualizer for banning.
>
> I made my case with Lee. It seems to me he was just being annoying to Tom.
> Now, others do annoying things to me all the time, but I don't exclude.
>
> The problem here is a failure to communicate, to ask, to "participate", to
> educate and to help.
>
> Indeed, the community is fractured. Indeed, people can be annoying
> Indeed, people can do bad things.
>
> But, goodness is fragile. Moreover, exclusion is not the answer for our
> problems. Inquisitions to rid ourselves of alternatives forecloses
> opportunity for us all.
>
> And movements fail. . . .
> --
> Sent from Mailbox <https://www.dropbox.com/mailbox> for iPhone
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Ronald Cotoni <setient at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Come to a meeting.  Read the bylaws and look at the wiki.  These
>> questions can be answered by those things
>> On Feb 25, 2014 5:47 PM, "Charles Tang" <cjtang1 at asu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Is active member defined be the label "member" or is it define by those
>>> who are "active."
>>>
>>> Or is there really a mythical "active member"
>>> --
>>> Sent from Mailbox <https://www.dropbox.com/mailbox> for iPhone
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 25 February 2014 17:42, Darius Garza <313kid at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > "A ban from the Noisebridge space may be a useful social punishment
>>>> for a
>>>> > social crime"
>>>> >
>>>> > Noisebridge is a lot of things, but it certainly isn't up to anyone
>>>> to use
>>>> > it as a "social punishment" tool.
>>>>
>>>> ... noisebridge is apparently whatever the active membership decide it
>>>> is. I thought that was the point.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -a
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20140225/b03c45d0/attachment.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list