[Noisebridge-discuss] access for members and associate members at all hours

Naomi Most pnaomi at gmail.com
Mon May 12 22:07:09 UTC 2014


It's just a misunderstanding, I've confirmed this w/ Jeffrey (unless
I'm completely off my rocker here, Jeffrey).

Can we all just agree not to use the phrase "member's only hours" from now on?

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2014, Naomi Most wrote:
>
>> What?  Who's talking about "member's only hours"?
>
>
> On Sun May 11 Jeffrey Carl Faden wrote:
>
>> I think if we're able to demonstrate a working RFID solution for the main
>> door and elevator door, it will be that much easier to propose what will
>> need to be a change in rules: the re-introduction of members-only hours (but
>> for associates, too). That will be the final hurdle preventing this system
>> from actually going live.
>>
>> Once members-only hours are reinstated, there's nothing that's stopping
>> associate and full members from exercising their power to remove non-members
>> from the space, just like they should have been doing the last time this was
>> attempted, and should he doing now with the "unvouched". But an actual
>> computer-controlled change in how the space operates would help to reinforce
>> that these rules are officially in effect.
>
>
> On Mon, 12 May 2014, Naomi Most wrote:
>
>> We're only talking about putting a lock at the front door that only
>> opens for people who have the right key, and those people will happen
>> to be Members and Associate Members.  This puts a forcing-function on
>> the "sponsorship" concept on activities happening between certain
>> hours of the night.  (I would put it at midnight, personally.)
>
>
> I think the number of people with a physical key to the front door, who are
> not welcomed hackers, is very low.  Furthermore, the few (if any) people who
> may have keys but are not welcome will cease to use their key once they see
> that none of their friends are at NB anymore, and that they can't do the
> kinds of bad things they want to do in the space anymore.
>
> Please see my last post for a checklist of improvements that can be made to
> the door and access control that DON'T involve changing the key.
>
> keep in mind that if you force-function "sponsorship" before people have
> access to the space, we will accidentally cut off access to new people who
> don't know anyone until after they're already in the space being excellent.
> I think that is a serious no-go zone.  But i agree that we should control
> access so that people can only be buzzed in by members/associate members,
> which corresponds with implicit sponsorship (until the person who buzzed
> them in may choose to end sponsorship)
>
>
>> Jake, I'm a little saddened by your post, because I think people who skim
>> the mailing list will read it and have their suspicions about NB's
>> exclusiveness confirmed, when AGAIN it's just a misunderstanding.
>
>
> please don't get dramatic on me Naomi.  and if you're so worried about what
> people think that by reading the list they will get turned off of visiting,
> i'm wondering what you think the space itself looks like.  Last time i
> visited it looked horrible, literally the worst i've ever seen it.
>
>
>> We're not having Member's Only Hours.  End of story.
>
>
> tell jeffrey.



-- 
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