Meeting Notes 2023 08 15

From Noisebridge
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Noisebridge | About | Visit | 272 | Manual | Contact | Guilds | Resources | Events | Projects | 5MoF | Meetings | Donate | (Edit)
Meetings | Process Meeting Template | Discussion Meeting Template | Archive | Metaguild Archive | Current Consensus Items | Consensus History | Announcements | Facilitation | Note-taking | (Edit)

These are the notes from the The 736th Meeting of Noisebridge.

Date: 2023-8-15

Previous Meeting

Next Meeting

Note-takers: Rob M.

Moderators: Mark

  • One or two bullet points of high-level meeting summary.

Meeting Summary[edit]


  • Fundraising Update:
  • Announcements:
  • Finances:
  • New members:
  • New associates:
  • Consensus Items:
  • Discussion Items:


  • Ask people to share their name, access needs, and preferred gender pronouns what they do at noisebridge

Dillon: First time, interest in machine learning and AI for financial data. Thinking about a meetup (coordinating with Paul) about a Meetup on the topic. Thinking Tuesday or Thursday evening. Group suggests Thursday as more likely since Tuesday already has Noisebridge and writing group which are both consistently attended during the same time. Thinking upstairs somewhere. Mark: Is this different from normal AI meetup? Dillon: Yeah, probably.

Short announcements and events[edit]

  • Pyconaut- Noisebridge was accepted into Maker Faire Bay area 2023 (and there was much applause and rejoicing) They want interactive projects. They're looking into what projects they can bring into the faire.
  • Probably not going to bring Flashy T, because it's not exactly a fit for the sort of projects they want.
  • Two weekends, tentatively accepted for one so far. Likely to be able to attend both,

especially if we have different projects to show both weekends.

  • October 13th - 15th, 20th - 22nd (Fri - Sun each). Prior Thursdays there's time to set up, and they can store things during the week (between ?).
  • Mare Island (ferry from SF 45 min or Oakland slightly more)
  • Not planning on bringing a larger vehicle (e.g. for the Taschen) unless requested.
  • Message them if you have any interactive projects you'd like to recommend to bring or with questions! (Slack or Discord)
  • Mark will make a Discord channel for coordinating.
  • Mark - Godot game development Meetup on Saturday 2pm - 6pm (3rd Saturday of the month until further notice)
  • Pyconaut: I plan to start trying to have neurotechx meetups again in the fall, I have some projects planned. but need to check in with neurotechx and the other co-leads. Time TBD!


Our One Rule is to Be Excellent to Each Other. (On first Tuesdays, seek a few definitions. Other Tuesday, give a 1-3 sentence summary.)

What does that mean? Please see our page on excellence!

Anti-Harassment Policy & Community Standards of Excellence[edit]

Noisebridge has an Anti-Harassment Policy Everyone is expected to follow the Anti-Harassment Policy, please familiarize yourself with it.) TWO MINUTES MAX More approachable & specific guidelines,


  • What are guilds - briefly describe (much like the previous section on "Excellence")

New Members/Associate Members[edit]

zoda! Sponsored by JD + Ben THERE WAS GREAT REJOICING IN ALL THE LAND (aka Noise in the Bridge)

Financial Report (first Tuesday of month only)[edit]

Anarchist societies under a capitalist state need money to survive and thrive, yo.

  • Monthly revenue, expenses. Big projects. Big fundraising events. Reserves in bank.
  • Any other details by those participating in handling our financials
  • The latest financial reports from the treasurer are available at

Spending Needs[edit]

Gotta spend money on XYZ (i.e. Gate, wiring etc.). WHO CAN SIGN THE CHECK OR LEND THE CREDIT CARD!?!?! It doesn't matter if we agree to do something and it can’t be paid for.

Fundraising Update[edit]

How's it all going

Big C Consensus Items[edit]

Nobody likes 3 hour meetings, only explain if people ask.

Consensus Items [edit]

Only for talking about Big C consensus items, small c consensus items should be discussed with people at the space at the time of the change/new item.


Pending Consensus Items Discussion[edit]

1) Membership process and language

  • Confusion about who can sponsor new Associate Members. Is it only full Members, or can associate members (e.g., right from day one) sponsor others.
  • Open questions, which will likely be put into separate consensus issues to keep this one granular: Do we need a third tier?
  • The two-week "oh shit" period is on the chopping block for consensus.
  • To become a full Member will require at least two full Member's

Ken: Suggestion for associate membership:

   Require at least one full Member to sponsor an associate member. One associate member sponsor wouldn't be enough anymore. 

zoda: Why do we want to make the associate member process more of a hurdle? Ben: They pay dues, so why make that harder?

Loren: Maybe we need another tier allowing access during open hours (before 24/7 access level). Elan: Second. Things like coming to the meetings, co-hosting an event, taking out the trash, etc... may be a better set of "hurdles".

JD: Part of the issue seems to be that people come in for their first time, get a sponser at their initial meeting, and immediately become an associate

Pyconaut: I thought it was always the case that you required a full Member to be sponsored as an associate member. He thinks that alone may be enough. There are people willing to donate plenty of money, but you wouldn't want around for other reasons.

JD: Agree with Pyconaut. Priority is to give time for people to get to know anyone new. The hurdle is worth it to filter out problematic people. Having a "checklist" of things you have to participate in may be taking it too far.

Max: Agrees with JD and Pyconaut. A lot of wht we are talking about is how we approach that meeting where we confirm peoples' associated memberships.. stuff like that. Maybe the application needs to be less "written in stone" and more up to Members being more proactive in handling it their way.

Ken: Also agrees. More emphasis on caring about the space, not just money and people/community. We don't need a formal set of requirements, but your effort towards caring for or improving the space should be important.

Rob: the determination, judgement that someone is contributing constructively to the space is a judgement made by full Members.

zoda: I 've been coming around a while, but don't really know who is and isn't a member. Barrier seems high to me. Also I know we are negative cash flow - we shouldn't be making it harder to Member-ize. It's hard because even after coming for a while, you don't always know who's a full Member. It takes time to learn how to care for all the different areas and equipment in the space. It generally doesn't need to be made harder. I like loren's idea about 24 hour access being more restricted. But exra barriers seem opposite to NB culture.

JD: Direct Response: In order for the full Members to be aware of anyone who might walk through the door and become an associate member, they would effectively need to be at every meeting.

Loren: We have very few levers here. This is a very lossy system. One thing we can do is have a 2 week show-up requirement for associate.

  • Another recognized level would help. Allowed to donate, be a "member', but not 24/7 access. Membership alone isn't going to be enough to make up the shortfall, regardless. We should look for other ways to raise revenue, e.g. charging for classes.

We need to keep the process simple, observable, and enforcable. Once people get through the "gate", is that motivating or de-motivating to take care of the space / community?

Ken: Why don't we have 24 hour access granted by certain quorum of Members?

Mark: (responding to zoda) Is it really that hard to find out who full Members are?

Loren: There are people who contribute positively to the space without ever learning who the full Members are.

Mark: There feels like a cultural loss about easy access to the space. The default should be to make it easy for new people to get into the space. The culture seems to have become more restrictive of late.

EHR: A lot of the issues being described could be resolved by having it publicized what membership applications are going through. Looking though meeting notes for the info is tough.

Rob: Do you mean big M members or associates? bc there isn't a pending period currently for associates.

Elan: I would also be in favor of a 2-week process for Associate Members

Mark: (clarifiying the 2wk process) They put in the application with sponsor week 1, week 2 if no one blocks, they become a member.

JD: Proposing change: If they have a sponsor, they should already have RFID open-hours access. Not 24/7 access. This is effectively the three tier approach we were mentioned.

Loren: Proposal: Let's physically post in the space a list of currently pending (or recently accepted?) associate Memberships. And also big-M.

EHR: Also make it clear on the public posting whether someone has donated.

Ken: Does this mean donations by Member or AM will be accounted by that particular member? Loren: Elan is starting this work, working on it already. One more thing: Lets make members more directly responsible for the people they sponsor and check back on that more. Always mention that in the notes Rob: Should we add a "would you like to sponsor this member" and have people sign? (few agreed: Ken and Loren I think)

Loren: In this first thirty day process, maybe there is a quick unsponsor option? For example, within a month, other Members could ask the sponsoring member to drop the Rob: Seems to me like the goal is to encourage the practice of the positive cultural norms... ???? some thing some thing.. sorry!

Max: This all comes down to making sure that Members are aware of who's coming in. So no change to the status quo policy. Encouraging the Members to get to know the associate members and make an effor to veto if you dont know them very well

Ken: Clarify what the expectations are for associate Members, or what activities are looked upon kindly, what contributes to the space, whithout necessarily making an official process.

JD: Dislikes the power dynamic implied, "if you want to be a member, take out the trash"

Mark: What do you think Zoda? zoda: I don't feel like I've seen enough associate members become Members to say for sure why we are doing this. So I retract a bit. The hurdles aren't toooo irrational or asking for too much. Mark: Also doesn't like, "I did X, Y, Z, so I've earned A, B, C"

Rob: The only thing that's really a problem is a certain level of bad behavior and below, which Members pay attention to and deal with.

Ken: But does the lack of initiative have any play in this? Does "being in the space" ualify as "caring for the space" enough?

Rob: If they aren't behaving in a negative way, I don't think its an issue.

Ben: I propose we move on from this entire discussion.

Michelle: If we're going to table and potentially bring back next week, can we motivate and contextualize why this is an issue at all?

Discussion Item 2[edit]

Consensus Item Draft 2 - Locking Guild Spaces

Pyconaut: Agree there should be locks, but long term it should be the RFID / electric system, not metal key. It's more practical that way, re-keying is too ard. Proposal: We need more lockers for equipment so more of the guilds feel more comfortable leaving their stuff in the space and sharing it. I feel more comfortable bringing things in and would bring more if I had more locker space to keep it safe.

Mark: Is it permission, or requirement.



Do-ocratic Task Board[edit]

Participation also means doing stuff to contribute to the space. Propose new tasks or pick some tasks from Github, from what needs to be done around you, or whatever, and see if someone will sign up to work on that task. Anyone can sign up and it's a great way to show you are contributing!

End of Meeting[edit]

Note taker posts the notes[edit]

  • Clean and tidy the meeting notes including removing all these really verbose instructions.
  • Fill out the short summary at the top listing just announcements, consensus items, discussion topics, and names of new members and philanthropists.
  • Copy paste the notes to the next meeting page. (They will become Last meeting at midnight.)
  • Email the meeting summary to Noisebridge Discuss and Noisebridge Announce lists.
  • CC on the email and if there are new members and philanthropists.
  • Edit the Current Consensus Items if anything is proposed for consensus next week.
  • Edit the Consensus Items History if anything was reached consensus or failed to reach consensus this week.

Fun things to do after[edit]

  • Do a 10 minute cleanup, bring dishes up stairs and wash them, clean the bathroom
  • Have some beers on the patio
  • Prepare the next weeks' meeting notes
  • Lick the walls. Or just draw on them
  • sing the Hackernationale (this almost never happens)