[sudo-discuss] Proposed changes to the articles of association
Sam Tepper
sam.tepper at gmail.com
Thu May 15 13:58:34 PDT 2014
Yeah, this seems a bit excessive to me. I don't think people should be
afraid to doze or fall asleep. Members already can kick out
non-members, and habitation is not allowed - why the need to take it so
much further? If there's a problem with a member sleeping in the space,
it should be dealt with like any other member conflict.
On 05/15/2014 12:01 AM, Gregg Horton wrote:
>
> How about a nap pass?
>
> On May 14, 2014 11:48 PM, "Marina Kukso" <marina.kukso at gmail.com
> <mailto:marina.kukso at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> sounds good. something that might help in documentation is an
> explicit message on the application form (or wherever) that
> "membership is typically granted barring some serious
> circumstances or reservations and that you shouldn't take the
> application questions extremely seriously because you're worried
> it might hurt your chances of being accepted - just feel free to
> be honest." that wording's not very good, but i think you get the
> idea.
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Matthew Senate
> <mattsenate at gmail.com <mailto:mattsenate at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> ah yes, I think the idea for that was to generally side on not
> specifying too narrowly, but instead to use "human judgment
> over automation and efficiency" and cultural protocol to
> navigate it. I think "serious issues" is a metric we are
> giving to future sudo room members in order for them to weigh
> heavily whether some issue that potentially prevents a member
> from joining is in fact of a "serious" nature. I'm of the
> disposition this means something that conflicts directly with
> sudo room's values and the articles of association.
>
> I actually think this process could be fairly easy to go
> through that doesn't need to be very intimidating. At the
> meeting tonight, everyone was in favor of putting time into
> implementing a better experience for new members so that this
> policy is clearly outlined and available in multiple formats
> (paper, on the website, etc)
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Marina Kukso
> <marina.kukso at gmail.com <mailto:marina.kukso at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> thanks matt. i like both of the changed wordings that
> you've suggested. i'd be happy with either version.
>
> still wondering about the second issue - what "serious
> issues" might be and what the criteria are that the group
> would vote people up or down on.
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Matthew Senate
> <mattsenate at gmail.com <mailto:mattsenate at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Phil,
>
> I think nothing in this policy /prevents
> /tele-presence, in fact, I think it would be prudent
> for a prospective member to, at the very least, offer
> to attend the meeting virtually if they cannot be
> physically present. Either way, the only requirement
> is the prospective member submits something concrete,
> in writing (format unspecified, so digital text seems
> fine).
>
> Marina,
>
> I have no strong feelings about the exact phrasing, I
> think those questions were carried over from Jake's
> original(ish) proposal, maybe? Marc, do you know where
> those questions came from?
>
> I do like the idea of asking questions to get three
> kinds of responses:
> 1. A response about why they are interested, leaving
> the opportunity for setting some context to joining.
> 2. A response about what specifically they want to do
> (commonly folks have particular projects or uses in
> mind as they get involved with sudo)
> 2. A response about specifically how they see
> themselves contributing to the community, as giving
> some sort contribution /is/ an expectation, but
> extremely open / liberal. I think "share" is a great
> term to express this.
>
> I have no reason to think we should hang on to the
> question about "hacking" in particular, maybe
> alternatives:
>
> #** What is your (pseudo)nym and/or name?
> #** Why do you want to be a member of sudo room?
> #** Do you happen to have something in mind that you
> would like to do at sudo room?
> #** Do you happen to have something in mind that you
> would like to share with the sudo room community?
>
> That being said, I'd also be happy with the truncated
> version:
>
> #** What is your (pseudo)nym and/or name?
> #** Why do you want to be a member of sudo room?
>
> // Matt
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Marina Kukso
> <marina.kukso at gmail.com
> <mailto:marina.kukso at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> thanks and apologies that i haven't had a chance
> to be a part of this discussion until now. i have
> a few questions:
>
> - re: "What are you excited about hacking at sudo
> room?" & "What are you excited about sharing with
> sudo room?" i wonder what effect seeing these
> questions on the application would have for
> someone who's really new to the world of hacking
> and/or someone who might not identify as a hacker
> (ie, someone who would consider themselves a
> "beginner" or "just learning" - as many of our
> members, including myself, do). like if you're not
> sure what you're interested on hacking...or if
> you're not sure what you have to share with sudo
> room. is anyone else concerned that these
> questions might be intimidating to newcomers? (i
> ask this genuinely). also, what happens if a
> prospective member puts on their application "i
> don't know" or "i'm not sure" for these questions?
> would that affect their application?
>
> this leads to my second question:
>
> Under "initial pondering" it says "#** The intent
> is for it to be very easy for new members to join,
> so only very serious concerns should be brought
> up." what would a "serious concern" be? also there
> isn't really any indication like..what the yes/no
> on a person's membership request is based on. does
> the content of what people put in their
> application matter?
>
> finally, what do folks think is gained by the
> hacking & sharing q's? do you think that you
> wouldn't get enough information from "what is your
> pseudonym/name" and "why do you want to be a
> member of sudo room?"
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Marc Juul
> <juul at labitat.dk <mailto:juul at labitat.dk>> wrote:
>
> These are the proposed changes brought up at
> the current sudo room meeting. We will attempt
> to consense on this at the sudo room meeting
> on Wednesday the 21st of May at 7 pm in sudo room.
>
> ===Section 2.1 Qualifications for Membership===
>
> [...]
>
> * Successfully completing the process for
> becoming a member, below:
>
> ====Section 2.1.0 Process for becoming a
> member====
>
> #'''Declaration of Intent to Join'''
> #* To become a member, a person must submit a
> brief written or spoken "Declaration of Intent
> to Join"where they answer the following questions:
> #**What is your (pseudo)nym and/or name?
> #** Why do you want to be a member of sudo room?
> #** What are you excited about hacking at sudo
> room?
> #** What are you excited about sharing with
> sudo room?
> #'''Initial Pondering'''
> #* It is only possible to become a member at
> the weekly sudo room meeting. Prospective
> members should attend if possible but can
> submit a written declaration if they are not
> able to attendin person.
> #* At the sudo room weekly meeting,
> everyprospective membermust leave the room
> while the existing members have a chance to
> bring up any concerns or reasons why the
> prospective member(s)should not be allowed
> membership (referred to as the "Initial
> Pondering").
> #** The intent is for it to be very easy for
> new members to join, so only very serious
> concerns should be brought up.
> #** If any existing member objects to a
> prospective new member becoming a member, and
> this cannot be resolved through discussion,
> then the prospective member will not be
> allowed membership.
> #** Unreasonable or frequent blocking of new
> members by an existing member is grounds for
> immediate termination of membership based on a
> 2/3 vote.
> #* Upon completing the "Initial Pondering",
> such prospectivemembers must be communicated
> to the sudo room mailing list within 24 hours,
> including their "Declaration of Intent to Join".
> #'''Extended Pondering'''
> #* After the Initial Pondering, if there are
> no objections,there will be one week for sudo
> room members to raise objections as to why the
> prospective member should not be allowed to
> join (referred to as the "Extended Pondering").
> #* If there are no objections raised during
> the "Extended Pondering", the prospective
> member will become a member.
> #** The intention is to provide sufficient
> time to ensure all concerns of those unable to
> attend the meeting may be heard.
> #* The new member will be added to the
> membership list and given access to desired
> and relevant assets and services of sudo room.
> #* No announcement of this change of
> statusafter the "Extended Pondering"is necessary.
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20140515/69c53dd2/attachment.html>
More information about the sudo-discuss
mailing list