[Noisebridge-discuss] Problem: people seeing NB as a backup shelter
daravinne at gmail.com
Fri May 9 18:51:26 UTC 2014
that was my initial suggestion when i floated the idea of putting in a
keypad. another key part of that idea was putting the keypad at the TOP OF
THE STAIRS (not outside the gate).
let me repeat that: the keypad needs to go AT THE TOP OF THE STAIRS.
of course everyone who ran with the idea put the stupid thing outside the
gate, and it was a dumb idea and i had to disinvolve myself because they
were fucking it up.
the reason it needs to go at the top of the stairs is so it will not affect
access to the rest of the building (let's not forget we are not the only
tenants who use that downstairs gate) and it will allow people to look
through the porthole and see who is even there in the first place. it
would probably be relatively trivial to just move the current keypad to the
top of the stairs and set up a timed lock mechanism.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
> A very cool suggestion was made at the SecWG meeting two Thursdays ago
> (next meeting this Thursday at 7pm!)
> The idea was to install a physical two-factor auth system, where the
> key still works, but between certain certain hours (or some other
> heuristic) there's a keypad that must be entered to allow the key to
> actually open the door.
> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 11:43 AM, daravinne <daravinne at gmail.com> wrote:
> > other people use the building besides us.
> > changing the lock would also halt the worldwide outreach that Mitch and
> > others do by giving hackers and hackerspaces in other countries copies of
> > the noisebridge key by rendering that keypattern obsolete.
> > the solution is a combination of access control, improved ownership of
> > redshirts team, and outreach within the space that guides people who are
> > using it as a crashpad / alternate shelter to other resources (which
> > simultaneously gets them out of the space and messages that the space is
> > definitely NOT a crashpad).
> > Since we are currently way past Dunbar's number AND mired in the Tragedy
> > the Commons, it will take some fairly special, admirable and dedicated
> > people to take ownership of these problems and see them through to
> > resolution (you know, sticking with it past all the initial-failure and
> > solving/tweaking mode stuff).
> > On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Hannah Grimm <dharlette at gmail.com>
> >> I think that the solution here is access control to the space.
> >> That starts with changing the lock, but I suspect that lots of folks
> >> be opposed to that.
> >> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Johny reported:
> >>> "I met a woman who informed me that she could not get a bed at a
> >>> shelter, so she came to Noisebridge."
> >>> #0: is this a problem? [yes, but is it a problem Noisebridge can fix?]
> >>> #1: What should we do to prevent this?
> >>> #2: If it can't be prevented, how should we address it when it arises?
> >>> --
> >>> Naomi Theora Most
> >>> naomi at nthmost.com
> >>> +1-415-728-7490
> >>> skype: nthmost
> >>> http://twitter.com/nthmost
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
> Naomi Theora Most
> naomi at nthmost.com
> skype: nthmost
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss