I actually *do* believe that this can be dealt with in a practical and reasonable way which is why I put this to the list.

I admit exasperation, however, with the critique that the community just doesn't care enough / is not sufficiently interested in making the space accessible. 

The community is not some amorphous / boundless resource *nor* is it some perfect ideological object.

It's real human beings in real space / time navigating all manner of confusing / complicated relationships.

I guess I was hoping that someone would be interested in assisting with addressing these concerns practically even if it's only to identify what we can / cannot do rather than simply write it off as yet one more way in which we're failing every day to live up to our "values". 

I think it's reasonable to say that we haven't found someone who has the time / energy to take this on right now and that people who have concerns around these issues should perhaps wait to engage with us until we're in a more solid place. 


N


On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Brad Borevitz <brad.borevitz@gmail.com> wrote:
can these issues be dealt with in a practical and reasonable way without resorting to the exasperated cop out reference to ideological perfectionism? and why all the antagonism?

if there are limited resources (and there are) then real issues need to be prioritized and dealt with in turn according to some sense of what is most important and what effects the most people. can the case be made that addressing chemical sensitivity is urgent and should be prioritized over other concerns?

chemical sensitivity is a controversial diagnosis without support from science based medical organizations like AMA or WHO. i don’t know much about it but from a quick wikipedia search it looks like there is some evidence that it can be psychosomatic. which is not to say it isn’t real or current science could be wrong, just that there doesn’t now seem to be any consensus or compelling evidence. that might explain some people’s dismissal.

but if there are potentially dangerous chemicals (maybe occupational health as safety regulations should be a guide here) being used around the omni without adequate ventilation and without informing people of where and when they might be exposed to these, that seems like an immediate issue. at the very least those using such chemicals, should have an obligation to notify others (signs and disclosure to omni general meeting) and a making a plan to isolate, mitigate and provide necessary ventilation.

and if perfume bothers people then those using it should be made aware and act with some consideration of other people around them. it’s just like being loud. in a crowded space that is shared without good ways to partition and isolate activities, we should be aware of the way we effect each other as we use the space. these distractions, though they may be at the level of annoyance rather than emergency, have real effects on the ability of the space to be effectively shared. take them seriously, but don’t exaggerate their significance by making them emotionally laden contests over control, authority, attention ...

b


On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:52 AM, niki <niki.shelley@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok. I will write her back and tell her that because not every person who enters the doors of the Omni is able to occupy a place of absolutely pure ideological perfection, we will not be addressing these issues in any meaningful way.
>
> N
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:31 PM, Ryan <yandoryn@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's not just one person or one situation. And it's not always in an aggressive way. And it's not just an issue of not caring (although I have experienced that). It's an issue of feasibility.
>
> I've heard snowball arguments. I know that Material Print Machine tries their hardest to be chemically sensitive but cannot function without some volatile chemicals that can cause problems.
>
> If we got some serious ventilation going on, maybe we'd be able to deal with CCL and sudo. But the 3D printers could be an issue.
>
> And the few times I've tried to broach this subject, I have hit hard walls. I've also had a lot of support. But I've also heard a lot of people basically say "it'd be too hard to care about such a small minority."
>
> I just think that anyone who is going to be dealing with this at the Omni needs to know that not everyone is on board and that they're going to hear some really insensitive stuff. From people you might not expect. My request to have the Omni ban simply spraying of perfume in the space left me in tears about ready to leave the space because of reactions like this from many members.
>
> I did have a specific issue with one member who I try not to interact with now, who followed me out and proceeded to become aggressive and tell me I can't survive in the real world, but that was handled for the most part. That's not the issue, though.
>
> I don't know. My brain isn't really functioning well (brain fog yay) but I think anyone dealing with accessibility at the Omni, especially things people are less versed in than physical (which is bad enough to deal with) should be well aware that while some people may be totally on board, there are some people who are solidly against.
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Laura Turiano <scylla@riseup.net> wrote:
> I would like to know who said that, Ryan, so that we can have a conversation with them about their attitude.
>
> Laura
>
>
> On 4/19/15 8:09 PM, Ryan wrote:
>> The consistent reaction I've gotten from the community at large is "We don't actually care about people with chemical sensitivities and would actively block any attempts to make the space more accessible to those with respiratory problems who are 'asking too much.'"
>>
>> So, it might be best to be honest with her, rather than pretend like the Omni is actually going to actively work to be accessible.
>>
>> Sorry if this sounds pessimistic, but eh.
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 8:06 PM, niki <niki.shelley@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello friends,
>>
>> Someone came in today who was very concerned with our efforts to make our space truly accessible - she was particularly concerned with building improvements and the impact on those with chemical sensitivities. She was also concerned with the sound system at today's event as there were some issues w/it that made it difficult for people to hear.
>>
>> She asked us to not use any materials that will inhibit those with chemical sensitivities from accessing the space and to create communication around our accessibility and needs.
>>
>> She asked to see our plan for how we will do this. We don't have this scoped out currently and I'm wondering if someone would be willing to take on the task of researching this issue and making recommendations to the building Working Group as well as drawing up a basic outline for providing greater accessibility.
>>
>> Can someone volunteer for this?
>>
>> xo
>>
>> N
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss@lists.omnicommons.org
>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> building mailing list
>>
>> building@lists.omnicommons.org
>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/building
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BayAreaPublicSchool-organizing" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bayareapublicschool-organizing+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BayAreaPublicSchool-organizing" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bayareapublicschool-organizing+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.