29 Oct
2013
29 Oct
'13
5:29 p.m.
The stubborn and nitpicky readers of contracts are actually part of
"strong, benevolent personalities".
The dichotomy is between people who are genuinely concerned for the
well-being of the community AND who have time/energy to be present in
it, and those who seek just to use the space and/or the people in it
without concern for social harmony or long-term maintenance.
Rhetoric doesn't perform the "work" of community, not nearly as much
as the act of being physically present in a space.
When those who are unenculturated and those who are malevolent to the
health of the community are physically present more than the
benevolent, the culture sours. No matter how good your Articles were
or are. There's always a way to subvert a written document; all you
have to do is convince enough people in your midst that certain words
matter more than other words.
What I've come to believe is that you can use hierarchical structures
to reinforce the culture you want.
If something happens, like the original group of cultural leaders
decides to take on a big project in Antarctica for half a year, you
are susceptible to major cultural swings. What you want is for there
to be a minimal vacuum when any strong personality decides to leave.
I'm (again) speaking through the lens of what I saw happen at
Noisebridge, and what is still currently the case there.
If you want Sudo Room to grow past (say) 150 people, you have to see
the work of culture as real work, that requires a real strategy.
We would all love, of course, for there to be no work in
enculturation. But we live in America, not pre-civilization Inuit
Alaska.
--Naomi
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Anca Mosoiu <anca(a)techliminal.com> wrote:
Good points, Naomi.
This ties into the paper that Jenny posted recently as well. Strong,
benevolent personalities are going to be needed to keep things moving
forward just as much as stubborn, nitpicky, careful readers of contracts.
Anca.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi(a)gmail.com> wrote:
--
Naomi Theora Most
naomi(a)nthmost.com
+1-415-728-7490
skype: nthmost
http://twitter.com/nthmost
Hi guys,
I haven't exactly been an active participant in Sudo Room lately, but
I have room in my life to handle some small amount of responsibility.
I'll accept the nomination.
I should say, though, that I've had a lot (a LOT) of conversations
with hackerspace founders lately, and I'm coming to the conclusion
that it is only the very exceptional community, with a very dedicated
presence of strong benevolent personalities, that doesn't eventually
come apart at the seams.
Noisebridge should not be held as a model of do-ocratic / flat
structure. It has serious, serious problems.
--Naomi
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Eddan Katz <eddan(a)clear.net> wrote:
--
-=-=-=-
Anca Mosoiu | Tech Liminal
anca(a)techliminal.com
M: (510) 220-6660
http://techliminal.com | T: @techliminal | F: facebook.com/techliminal So by my count, the following summarizes the
status of the Board
nominations. Please correct any errors I've made.
--
Confirmed
Max (notconfusing)
Jenny (tunabananas)
Nominated
Marc (marcjc)
Matt (mattsenate)
Marina (mk30)
J.C. (r33lmm)
Vicky (ykciv)
Liberty (thattechgirl)
Respectfully Decline
Kare (kkr)
Jordan (yardena)
------
Apparently, the average size of a non-profit board is 16 people, and the
median is 15.
I don't know anyone's handle, but I also wanted to nominate the
following
people who have also shown the commitment that I think would make for a
good
Sudo Board member:
Ryan Bethencourt
Anthony di Franco
Johanna Faust
Hol Gaskill
Leonid Kozukh
Anca Mosoiu
Naomi Most
Romy Snowyla
On Oct 27, 2013, at 7:32 PM, Jenny Ryan <tunabananas(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Eddan Katz <eddank(a)gmail.com> wrote:
--
Naomi Theora Most
naomi(a)nthmost.com
+1-415-728-7490
skype: nthmost
http://twitter.com/nthmost
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
I don't think that coming to evening meetings and weekend events should
be
the ultimate metric of commitment to Sudo Room.
Not everyone can make it at those times because of work and family
obligations.
Agreed, thanks for picking up on that and giving an opening to
describing
all the ways in which people regularly show their commitment to Sudo
Room:
There's also building infrastructure in the space, creating/making
awesome
things, giving tours, managing the landlord situation, managing the
trash
(thanks david k!), leading classes/workshops/meetups, CLEANING and
BEAUTIFYING the space [the move to colorful late-night mood lighting the
other week was especially clutch].
BTW, our Wishlist has recently been updated in case folks want to
contribute
tangible Things: https://sudoroom.org/wiki/Wishlist
Jenny
On Oct 27, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Jenny Ryan <tunabananas(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Sudo Room should not sacrifice its foundational values so as to be
taken
seriously by traditional power structures. This is part and parcel of
being
a vessel of social change. Noisebridge has an ad hoc and ever-changing
do-ocracy of leaders, as does Sudo. The inscription of a Board merely
makes
static what is in actuality a dynamic aspect of the community, hence
its
role (in the vein of honesty and radical transparency) is as merely an
on-paper minimum satisfactory requirement for bureaucratic processes.
Come
to any meeting of Noisebridge or Sudo and it will be readily apparent
who's
currently taking on leadership roles.
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss