[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge House Rules

Naomi Most pnaomi at gmail.com
Mon Mar 24 18:58:06 UTC 2014


Ah, here it is:

https://github.com/noisebridge/bureaucracy/pull/24

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
> As I wrote on a pull request of yours, Greg (a comment which I can no
> longer locate to link to):
>
> I'm concerned that these changes presume quite a lot about the
> capacities and abilities of the CWG even before it has had a chance to
> ramp up.
>
> I do *like* what you've written, but it's premature to legislate a
> flow of problems into the CWG before it's even been born.
>
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Kevin <bfb at riseup.net> wrote:
>> On March 24, 2014 11:21:39 AM PDT, Gregory Dillon <gregorydillon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I met to collaborate with Kevin regarding the house rules proposal.
>>> We
>>> had a full and frank conversation, and  found significant agreement in
>>> purposes and aspirations.
>>>
>>> As part of that process, I have created my draft of a document, which
>>> I
>>> prefer to call fair usage policy.   It is now on the github repository
>>> as apull
>>> request.<https://github.com/noisebridge/bureaucracy/pull/24/files?short_path=72650ec#diff-72650ec3320e10419ed3f724d40e4a68>
>>>
>>> I hope that we can keep this conversation continuing and productive.
>>> I
>>> don't know of any deadline, but I think it would be excellent if Kevin
>>> could also provide his draft of house rules with enough time for
>>> people to
>>> review before the Tuesday meeting.
>>>
>>> Bests
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 9:27 AM, immonad <immonad at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Did anyone else get a good laugh,  that  during the last two weekly
>>> > meetings at least one person appeared  to be sleeping just a few
>>> feet away.
>>> > Each had a smirky smile as they appeared to awaken from  their naps.
>>>  These
>>> > guys practically  lives at NB and are against any talk against using
>>> it as
>>> > such. One of them (newest member) was also against the action of
>>> asking
>>> > people to leave for drugs.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -------- Original message --------
>>> > From: Al Sweigart
>>> > Date:03/23/2014 5:26 PM (GMT-08:00)
>>> > To: Dan Cote
>>> > Cc: Jessica Ross ,noisebridge-discuss
>>> > Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge House Rules
>>> >
>>> > "Community standards" is just doublespeak for "rules that are
>>> optional".
>>> > This is generally espoused by the crowd that likes sleeping
>>> overnight at
>>> > Noisebridge, because it lets them continue sleeping overnight at
>>> > Noisebridge.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Dan Cote
>>> <terminationshok at gmail.com>wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> It's a long standing property of Noisebridge that we favor
>>> individual
>>> >> freedom over codified policies. I know that we are experiencing an
>>> identity
>>> >> crisis at the moment, and we are rethinking how we do things, which
>>> is
>>> >> good. All of the line items look fine to me, but their name and
>>> tone is
>>> >> authoritarian. I would not support this in it's current form and
>>> >> respectfully ask that it be reworked before being brought for
>>> consensus
>>> >> again.
>>> >>
>>> >> We have and have had community standards that are very similar to
>>> these,
>>> >> and my suggestion would be that we remove "house rules" and we
>>> clean up and
>>> >> revise "community standards."
>>> >>
>>> >> What we need is not official sounding rules, but consistent and
>>> >> compassionate reinforcement of our community standards. I would and
>>> do
>>> >> support anyone who asks someone to leave based on the behavior
>>> patterns
>>> >> listed on either list.
>>> >>
>>> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Community_standards
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Gregory Dillon
>>> <gregorydillon at gmail.com>wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Keving   I'd like to come to a good fair and workable solution.
>>> I'm
>>> >>> somewhat reticent  because I'm concerned that collaborating will
>>> slide into
>>> >>> a process that is more about delaying than implementing a
>>> solution.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> But please contact me off-list and let's talk.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Kevin <bfb at riseup.net> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> On March 19, 2014 12:19:44 PM PDT, Gregory Dillon <
>>> >>>> gregorydillon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>> > Kevin,
>>> >>>> > No one said Folsom prison for naptime.
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >  Are you - or are you not, going to include prohibiting
>>> sleeping at
>>> >>>> > Noisebridge in your version of the house rules.?
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Kevin <bfb at riseup.net> wrote:
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > > On March 19, 2014 11:45:24 AM PDT, Gregory Dillon
>>> >>>> > <gregorydillon at gmail.com>
>>> >>>> > > wrote:
>>> >>>> > > > Tthe meeting notes say
>>> >>>> > > >  Kevin is willing to accept prohibiting sleeping at
>>> Noisebridge,
>>> >>>> > > > - Will that be part of your proposal?
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> >>>> > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kevin <bfb at riseup.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > On March 19, 2014 11:07:24 AM PDT, Jessica Ross
>>> >>>> > > > <jessica.r.ross at gmail.com>
>>> >>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> >>>> > > > > > Why can't you guys rebut this with "It's against the
>>> terms of
>>> >>>> > the
>>> >>>> > > > > > lease and
>>> >>>> > > > > > could get us evicted"?
>>> >>>> > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > It's BS that you're even still debating this!
>>> >>>> > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Al Sweigart
>>> >>>> > > > <asweigart at gmail.com>
>>> >>>> > > > > > wrote:
>>> >>>> > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > > Kevin is against banning sleeping at the space
>>> because he
>>> >>>> > and
>>> >>>> > > > his
>>> >>>> > > > > > friends
>>> >>>> > > > > > > like to sleep at the space. He helped build the
>>> "hacker
>>> >>>> > stacker"
>>> >>>> > > > > > bunk beds
>>> >>>> > > > > > > that were in the space which, unsurprisingly, were
>>> used for
>>> >>>> > more
>>> >>>> > > > > > than just
>>> >>>> > > > > > > short naps in the space.
>>> >>>> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > > Kevin will single-handedly block any measure to ban
>>> sleeping
>>> >>>> > > > without
>>> >>>> > > > > > > compromise, because consensus lets him do this. He is
>>> >>>> > against
>>> >>>> > > > any
>>> >>>> > > > > > actual
>>> >>>> > > > > > > punitive consequences because he knows that even if
>>> people
>>> >>>> > are
>>> >>>> > > > woken
>>> >>>> > > > > > up and
>>> >>>> > > > > > > told not to sleep at the space, they can just do so
>>> again
>>> >>>> > the
>>> >>>> > > > next
>>> >>>> > > > > > night
>>> >>>> > > > > > > (or just later that same morning).
>>> >>>> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > > Hey, if the majority of Noisebridge members said they
>>> were
>>> >>>> > fine
>>> >>>> > > > with
>>> >>>> > > > > > > people sleeping at the space, I would back down on my
>>> >>>> > stance.
>>> >>>> > > > > > Whereas Kevin
>>> >>>> > > > > > > will barge in on a meeting an hour late and then get
>>> his
>>> >>>> > way.
>>> >>>> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > > The thing that gets me is that he doesn't even have
>>> to
>>> >>>> > publicly
>>> >>>> > > > > > defend his
>>> >>>> > > > > > > unpopular view in order to get his way. (Note that he
>>> didn't
>>> >>>> > > > mention
>>> >>>> > > > > > > sleeping at all in his email on this thread, even
>>> though
>>> >>>> > that's
>>> >>>> > > > the
>>> >>>> > > > > > > elephant in the room.) All he has to do is keep
>>> saying
>>> >>>> > "there
>>> >>>> > > > needs
>>> >>>> > > > > > to more
>>> >>>> > > > > > > discussion" week after week until the issue fades
>>> into the
>>> >>>> > > > > > background once
>>> >>>> > > > > > > more.
>>> >>>> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Kevin Schiesser
>>> >>>> > > > <bfb at riseup.net>
>>> >>>> > > > > > wrote:
>>> >>>> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> Brandon Edens:
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> > Hi all,
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> > The consensus of Noisebridge is that we have some
>>> house
>>> >>>> > > > rules.
>>> >>>> > > > > > You can
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> read
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> > about them here...
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > >
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> >>>> > >
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>>
>>> https://github.com/noisebridge/bureaucracy/blob/master/rules/house-rules.md
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> > Enjoy!
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> > Brandon
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> I barged into the open meeting an hour late tonight
>>> and
>>> >>>> > > > rejected
>>> >>>> > > > > > the
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> civility of passing this proposal, given I had aired
>>> >>>> > > > unaddressed
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> concerns. Discussion on the proposal was reopened,
>>> hence
>>> >>>> > > > > > Noisebridge has
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> not come to consensus on 'house rules'.
>>> >>>> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> I will be preparing an alternative draft. If anyone
>>> wants
>>> >>>> > to
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> collaborate, contact me via email or let's work
>>> though
>>> >>>> > github.
>>> >>>> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> Generally, I favor 'community agreements'. I oppose
>>> >>>> > punitive
>>> >>>> > > > > > measures,
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> and do not believe punitive measure will positively
>>> >>>> > transform
>>> >>>> > > > > > Noisebridge.
>>> >>>> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> If agreements are to be codified, we should start
>>> with the
>>> >>>> > most
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> abundantly clear agreements... We agree not to
>>> attempt to
>>> >>>> > > > repair
>>> >>>> > > > > > the
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> elevator, not to go on the roof (unless
>>> maintenancing an
>>> >>>> > > > antenna),
>>> >>>> > > > > > not
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> to go in the basement, not to go on the fire escape,
>>> not to
>>> >>>> > > > live at
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> Noisebridge. We also agree that projects kept on the
>>> hacker
>>> >>>> > > > shelves
>>> >>>> > > > > > in
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> the SW corner of the space or kept in personal
>>> lockers
>>> >>>> > belong
>>> >>>> > > > to
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> participants in the community and are not for
>>> general
>>> >>>> > purpose
>>> >>>> > > > > > hacking.
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> <Add your own agreement>.
>>> >>>> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> -Kevin
>>> >>>> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> > > > > > >> 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
>>> >>>> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > > --
>>> >>>> > > > > > Jessica R. Ross
>>> >>>> > > > > > jessica.r.ross at gmail.com
>>> >>>> > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > I'm very open to collaborating on a revised Draft of this
>>> >>>> > document.
>>> >>>> > > > >  Please read the meeting notes or try to understand what
>>> I wrote
>>> >>>> > > > before
>>> >>>> > > > > jumping in with critique. Polarization, accusation, and
>>> >>>> > hyperbole
>>> >>>> > > > are not
>>> >>>> > > > > effective.
>>> >>>> > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > For context...
>>> >>>> > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > At every prior meeting I said that I had concerns with
>>> the house
>>> >>>> > > > rules
>>> >>>> > > > > proposal. Often, the agenda was too full of bannings to
>>> have
>>> >>>> > > > substantive
>>> >>>> > > > > discussion of my concerns. I was shocked to arrive late
>>> and hear
>>> >>>> > > > consensus
>>> >>>> > > > > was reached without having had opportunity for
>>> discussion. The
>>> >>>> > group
>>> >>>> > > > agreed
>>> >>>> > > > > I was previously misunderstood, the proposal is not
>>> urgent, and
>>> >>>> > that
>>> >>>> > > > more
>>> >>>> > > > > discussion is needed.
>>> >>>> > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > Hence more discussion and reaching out to the community.
>>> >>>> > > > >
>>> >>>> > > > > _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> > > > > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> >>>> > > > > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> >>>> > > > >
>>> >>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>> >>>> > > > >
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> >>>> > > >
>>> >>>> > > > --
>>> >>>> > > > Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>> >>>> > >
>>> >>>> > > I'm ideologically opposed to criminalizing sleep at
>>> Noisebride. Many
>>> >>>> > > organizations understand the benefits of rest, and allow
>>> sleep to
>>> >>>> > occur
>>> >>>> > > alongside work/hacking/creating.
>>> >>>> > >
>>> >>>> > > I recognize Noisebridge has problems Many have identified
>>> sleep as
>>> >>>> > one. I
>>> >>>> > > maintain its a symptom and not a root problem. However, I'm
>>> open to
>>> >>>> > > experiments. We tried HackerStackers... If folks want to try
>>> >>>> > prohibition, I
>>> >>>> > > won't stand in the way.
>>> >>>> > >
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > --
>>> >>>> > Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Greg,
>>> >>>> Do you want to collaborate? Do you like the existing wording on
>>> the
>>> >>>> prohibition of sleep at Noisebridge?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Left to my own devices I would first codify existing agreements,
>>> then
>>> >>>> add new agreements. This pattern allows us to test additional
>>> agreements
>>> >>>> independently.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> -Kevin
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>> >>>
>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>> 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
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Let's stay in touch.  Greg
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>> Thanks Greg. That's great. I also enjoyed a spontaneous gathering of 4 or 5 folks interested in this discussion on Wednesday night. Some notes were taken, and suggestions made. It would also be great if the notes make it to the mailing list or sub thread that I started as a result of that gathering.
>>
>> I'll write up my preferred language later tonight.
>>
>> -Kevin
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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