[sudo-discuss] Instant 24/7 access? Do we allow for this? And how?

Julio Rios julio.rios at gmail.com
Thu Apr 4 15:59:38 PDT 2013 

The definition, as defined by the articles, was, and maybe still is,
sufficiently vague to allow many of us to become "members" without having
to jump through many hurdles.  This was probably intentional.  However, if
we are discussing more tangible benefits, and responsibilities, in
accordance to the core values, this thread has brought up a number of
issues which may mean it is time to define what membership is more
concretely.  I can help on a proposal for amendment, but would appreciate
if someone else takes the lead.

Is anyone fundamentally opposed to making membership more of a "process",
potentially requiring consensus from existing members?
I would NOT want to limit existing access to non-members, but rather,
codifying how to become a member, how to sustain membership, and what
explicit responsibilities/benefits are associated with membership as
opposed to non-membership.



On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Marina Kukso <marina.kukso at gmail.com> wrote:

> hi everyone, the definition of membership, requirements to become a
> member, and the benefits of membership are discussed in our articles of
> association<https://sudoroom.org/wiki/page/Articles_of_Association#Section_2.0_Definition>
> :
>
> Section 2.0 Definition
>
> *sudo room* is a deliberative collective, meaning there is horizontal
> democratic control and participatory management of the organization, which
> is composed of all individual members. However, the group actively strives
> to substantially incorporate interested community participants and
> beneficiaries who are non-members. Members agree to decisions made by *sudo
> room* as well the terms of these Articles of Association and all future
> amendments.
>
> By using spaces or services operated by *sudo room*, community
> participants and beneficiaries are obligated to respect all decisions by *sudo
> room* as well as the terms of these Articles of Association and all
> future amendments.
> [edit<https://sudoroom.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Articles_of_Association&action=edit&section=6>
> ]Section 2.1 Qualifications for Membership
>
>    - Membership is defined by fulfilling the following requirements:
>       1. Contributing monthly dues (sliding-scale with respect to
>       operating costs) or equivalent.
>          - It is an express purpose of the group to keep membership rates
>          low, and therefore accessible, as well as offer, when possible,
>          alternatives to monetary contribution to suffice for monthly dues.
>       2. A status of good standing with the organization.
>          - Unresolved debts and/or substantial lapses in respecting the
>          values of the organization and its members may result in suspension of
>          membership, to be determined by fair process respecting individual rights
>          and freedoms and the integrity of community norms.
>
> [edit<https://sudoroom.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Articles_of_Association&action=edit&section=7>
> ]Section 2.2 Sudo Functionaries
>
> [snipped<https://sudoroom.org/wiki/page/Articles_of_Association#Section_2.2_Sudo_Functionaries>
> ]
> [edit<https://sudoroom.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Articles_of_Association&action=edit&section=8>
> ]Section 2.3 Benefits
>
> The following are benefits available to all members:
>
>    - Usable assets and resources available within reasonable constraints
>    of time and under the condition of sharing.
>       - *sudo room* strives to make assets and resources available to as
>       many non-member participants and beneficiaries as possible.
>       - Note: no personal property should be stored in *sudo room* unless
>       a system for personal storage can be provided by *sudo room*.
>       - Note: the use of *sudo room* environments for habitation and/or
>       domestic use is strongly discouraged.
>    - Approved discounts and services negotiated through the collective
>    purchasing power of *sudo room*.
>       - Items are up to the discretion of *sudo room* to determine
>       through its budgeting and decision-making processes.
>    - A *safe space,* which is defined as:
>       - "A place where anyone can relax and be fully self-expressed,
>       without fear of being made to feel uncomfortable, unwelcome, or unsafe on
>       account of biological sex, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender
>       identity or expression, cultural background, age, or physical or mental
>       ability; a place where the rules guard each person's self-respect and
>       dignity and strongly encourage everyone to respect others." —
>       Advocates for Youth via Wikipedia<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe-space>
>       .
>
>
> - marina
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:33 PM, aestetix <aestetix at aestetix.com> wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> As someone who was involved in Noisebridge for longer than is healthy,
>> I can vouch that, like everything else, their membership process is
>> not perfect.
>>
>> That said, it might be worthwhile to create a list of what you want
>> "membership" to mean, and craft a process around that list.
>>
>> Hail Eris,
>> aestetix
>>
>> On 4/4/13 2:18 PM, rusty lindgren wrote:
>> > Good points,
>> >
>> > There are some other threat models to work through, but this would
>> > be a great place to start from.
>> >
>> >
>> > -Rusty
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Julio Rios <julio.rios at gmail.com
>> > <mailto:julio.rios at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I was listening to the Noisebridge tour sent by Vicky and it seems
>> > like their membership process
>> > <http://youtu.be/2wGMjRJpLCA?t=10m02s> is a little more formalized
>> > <http://youtu.be/2wGMjRJpLCA?t=8m58s>.  I would support doing
>> > something similar, though perhaps not exactly the same.... as
>> > Sonja suggested. I would think full members (per some criteria)
>> > would get access 24/7, and everyone else can access the space if a
>> > member is already there (as is usually the case now, though the
>> > definition of "member" is currently somewhat vague).
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:52 PM, rusty lindgren
>> > <rustylindgren at gmail.com <mailto:rustylindgren at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Same, Welcome Sonja!
>> >
>> > Thanks for your thoughts.  It's really important to the group that
>> > all humans feel like there is a good level of safety in the space.
>> >
>> >
>> > :D
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Marina Kukso
>> > <marina.kukso at gmail.com <mailto:marina.kukso at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > welcome sonja!
>> >
>> >
>> > +a million to jordan's email.
>> >
>> > - marina
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Sonja Trauss
>> > <sonja.trauss at gmail.com <mailto:sonja.trauss at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi I'm totally new here and I don't know any of you. I live in west
>> > Oakland but I belong to Noisebridge! Absurd. I agree with an
>> > earlier poster that it is valuable to make members/ people work for
>> > what they get. Not giving ppl 24 h access is as justifiable for
>> > that reason as it is for the safety reasons. I suggest you adopt
>> > the age-old policy of having to get a current member to recommend
>> > you in order to be a full member (24-h access). Someone like me
>> > could become a partial member immediately, with limited access,
>> > and then I would have to meet some people and get one (or two, if
>> > that's the rule) to sign off on me being a full member. It sounds
>> > exclusive, but it's actually already how communities work.
>> >
>> > On Apr 4, 2013 11:57 AM, "rusty lindgren" <rustylindgren at gmail.com
>> > <mailto:rustylindgren at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hey Everyone,
>> >
>> > Just thought I would point this out, since it came up earlier in
>> > the dues thread.  But, Marc's point(a very good marketing point
>> > about 24/7 access), has as a big security exception, we didn't
>> > really talk about, probably mostly because of time.
>> >
>> > Basically, it's easy for us to think "hey, we should let this
>> > person have access, because they seem cool, and we want to remain
>> > open," but even I get sketched out at night sometimes, and there
>> > are real safety issues at work here, and we should discuss them in
>> > relation to cost/benefits for the space.  It's also entirely
>> > possible that we trust someone, and they just do something bad
>> > anyway.  We don't really spend a lot of time thinking about this,
>> > but this is something we haven't had to really deal with yet,
>> > because we've had really shitty access up until now.
>> >
>> > I don't know if my survey asked this question properly, but I was
>> > trying to see if 24/7 access was worth more to people as a value,
>> > but I think for some people it could be a safety draw-back, and at
>> > least in 1 case this is true.  I also am not sure it's really
>> > something we should be promoting, if we do decide on it being okay
>> > for members to do.
>> >
>> > If anyone wants to post about how they feel about this(I think it
>> > really is about feelings in this case, because it's about promoting
>> > membership and establishing wants/needs), then please feel free to
>> > reply here.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Rusty **
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss
>> > mailing list sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> > <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>> > http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss
>> > mailing list sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> > <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>> > http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -- Cheers,
>> >
>> > Rusty Lindgren **
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss
>> > mailing list sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> > <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>> > http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -- Cheers,
>> >
>> > Rusty Lindgren **
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss
>> > mailing list sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> > http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
>> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
>>
>> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRXfG9AAoJEOrRfDwkjbpT6UoH/3LTHcm0Hy5L364oQ3BG8vat
>> meQlWpki1ZfeyJmxzBKWO9V0SGNBugFeSISFvL1hPUpHNRJoQyDo2+F/LIrBvIEG
>> OblAb6pORcAZP1qCzrRbz8HeWn4YXRuUuKZV4HaOTd5PqRkwL0DPuv0tfU0xOOv/
>> wFjlfMgb0Ieu3cKhnxIoJTtF29jWHejmq6SOSEnTawRCVsU/6ueZcf87IR4NVJ50
>> veS3l0/ZvFAyDKONg7TVr8uzHS3PB8fPPpRxdz0JHwSvZV5La+VXia5f1vFS9w5m
>> jijwRxsKgn23yTF1OMHcTu8N8EVGPamzFeHiPAouPq2fE//aISwUHxbg9Geho58=
>> =jf40
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130404/f90d898c/attachment.html>

More information about the sudo-discuss mailing list