I'm not saying the proposal is meaningless, just that the risk of saying
yes to your comrades here is extremely low compared to the risk of
alienating them by saying no. Just let it play out and argue over the
actual results rather than arguing over hypotheticals. The way you're going
about this is just so needlessly high temperature. And comparing cleaning
fees to "violence" or a police department with an "iron fist" is next
level
ridiculous coming from the same person who railed for months against Homes
Not Jails becoming a collective without paying arbitrary amounts of money.
The only common denominator I see here is that you are a serial blocker of
things, Jake. I think you have been consistently abusing your blocking
power to the detriment of the whole consensus process.
On Sun, Oct 2, 2022, 3:22 PM Jake <jake(a)spaz.org> wrote:
if there is no power conferred by the delegates
approving that part of
their
proposal, then I don't see why it's necessary for the delegates to pass the
proposal. They already have the ability to assert that someone should pay
fines in the way you're suggesting.
-jake
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 10:34 PM Cere Misc
<cere.misc(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> But would it work tho? Presumably, some of you know who this kind of
> scenario might apply to, I currently have no clue. If such a system
were
> on place would it effectively work as a
deterrent to prevent future
> problems?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 5:08 PM Yardena Cohen via sudo-discuss <
> sudo-discuss(a)sudoroom.org> wrote:
>
>> It's so bizarre to me that you're just speaking about messes like
>> they're hypotheticals. The reality is that all our spaces are
>> disastrously disgusting, a structure for consequences is already way
>> way overdue, the patience and good faith of people who do regular
>> cleaning labor is already worn out, and we need actual solutions that
>> don't pile yet more expectations of the same kind of feminized and
>> racialized labor (cleaning + communication) onto the same set of
>> burnt-out volunteers. The burden should be on the people who are
>> turning our commons into a tragedy, not on the people trying to
>> restore it.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 12:22 PM Jake <jake(a)spaz.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yar, since when can action not be taken? If someone makes a proposal
>> at the
>>> delegates meeting to do something about a mess, for example a
>> collective that
>>> has moved out and left a bunch of stuff behind, and we have to pay for
>> services
>>> to remove it, it's a simple measure to pass the proposal and make it
>> happen.
>>>
>>> A person or collective ignoring clear communications about a specific
>> mess is
>>> a serious issue and should be discussed and dealt with by our
>> community, and we
>>> can't evade that responsibility by deputizing an individual or group
to
>> levy
>>> fines with no oversight. That's what i'm objecting to. Everything
>> else has
>>> already been passed, and we haven't even tried addressing these
problems
>>>> without the weaponization of this new committee.
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand why, after passing everything except the ability
to
>>> levy
>>>> fines, we're still focusing on approving that part of the proposal
as
>>> if it's a
>>>> highly important and desirable dynamic that we want to add to our
>>> community.
>>>>
>>>> -jakonlye
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022, Yardena Cohen via sudo-discuss wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Kent, that is what the proposal says and what the committee
intends.
>>>>> They're not authoritarian monsters. Their plan is to ask first,
with
>>>>> kindness and diplomacy, give people some time, and then impose
fines
>>>>> if that doesn't work.
>>>>>
>>>>> The status quo is that no matter how bad things get, "some sort
of
>>>>> action by Omni" cannot be taken, and Jake is blocking the part
of the
>>>>> proposal which says action could eventually be taken.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 8:49 PM Kent Leech via sudo-discuss
>>>>> <sudo-discuss(a)sudoroom.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Why not just ask the messy groups to clean up first? Kindness
and
>>> diplomacy can go further. Give the messy group some time to tidy up and
>>> move on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it’s a real dysfunctional group that ignores multiple
clean-up
>>> requests, then some sort of action by Omni could be taken.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Kent
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kent Leech Illustration
>>>>>>
http://www.kentleech.com
>>>>>> kent(a)kentleech.com
>>>>>> +1 (510) 504-0634
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Jake Watters via sudo-discuss
<sudo-discuss(a)sudoroom.org>
>>>>>> Reply-To: Jake Watters <typeinthenumber(a)gmail.com>
>>>>>> Date: Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 2:35 AM
>>>>>> To: <sudo-discuss(a)sudoroom.org>
>>>>>> Subject: [sudo-discuss] [omni-consensus] Cleanliness
Accountability
>>> Committee proposal
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Sudoroom,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> THIS IS IMPORTANT!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The following proposal was brought to the delegate's meeting
a
>>> couple of weeks
>>>>>> ago, and tonight in the meeting it was discussed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since I had not been attending delegates meetings for some time,
I
>>> failed to
>>>>>> forward this proposal to this list so that sudoroom could
discuss
>>> our position
>>>>>> on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since I am a Sudoroom member, I voiced my position through our
>>> delegate (which
>>>>>> is me) that I am against giving a committee the power to levy
fines
>>> against
>>>>>> omni collectives/tenants/people, especially since we have not
tried
>>> a process
>>>>>> of simple communication between a cleaning collective and
>>> representatives of
>>>>>> collectives.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ultimately the other Omni delegates felt strongly about passing
the
>>> proposal,
>>>>>> but they were willing to remove the provision giving the new
>>> Committee the
>>>>>> ability to "impose a monetary penalty" on groups or
individuals they
>>> determined
>>>>>> were guilty of being messy. The proposal was partially passed
as
>>> seen here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
https://omnicommons.org/wiki/Event:2022/09/15_Delegates#cleanliness
>>>>>> yar: if we approve the proposal but delay the fine enforcement
until
>>> after our
>>>>>> october 6 meeting, and require another affirmative
consensus
>>> decision on
>>>>>> october 6 to give them that fine enforcement power?
>>>>>> jake: is ok with that
>>>>>> CONSENSUS: YES (CCL/Patrik ANV/Silver SUDOROOM/Jake FNB/Helen
>>> CLP/Billy
>>>>>> MOP/Jacqi)
>>>>>> ABSTAIN: (SUDOMESH/Camber)
>>>>>> BLOCK: (none), PASSES!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I personally think it's unreasonable to trust a newly
formed
>>> Committee with
>>>>>> the power to, for example, determine that Sudoroom is too messy
and
>>> issue
>>>>>> "fines" of $50 per day until they feel that we have
satisfied their
>>> standard,
>>>>>> and I'm glad that the other delegates were willing to remove
this
>>> provision
>>>>>> even though they were technically capable of overriding
sudoroom's
>>> objections.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This provision is set to be reintroduced at the Delegate's
meeting
>>> on OCTOBER
>>>>>> 6TH and Sudoroom needs to discuss our position, in order for
our
>>> delegate to
>>>>>> represent us at that meeting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please see the link below for the proposed text of the new
Committee
>>> (same link
>>>>>> is in the meeting notes above) and discuss the provision
that's
>>> slated for
>>>>>> October 6th Delegate's meeting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -jake
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>>> Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2022 06:08:55 +0000
>>>>>> From: deskhandle <deskhandle(a)protonmail.com>
>>>>>> To: consensus <consensus(a)lists.omnicommons.org>
>>>>>> Subject: [omni-consensus] Cleanliness Accountability Committee
>>> proposal
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
https://cryptpad.fr/pad/#/2/pad/edit/GcTDiTZqA3ao5+6hbaAuobdc/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At the delegate's meeting tonight, we discussed a proposal
>>> formulated by the
>>>>>> Events team which is linked above. This is a draft proposal and
>>> instructions
>>>>>> for how to suggest edits are on top of the doc. Please do not
edit
>>> the content
>>>>>> directly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In short, it exists to create a new committee which will oversee
the
>>>>>> cleanliness of the space, design and implement new systems to do
so,
>>> including
>>>>>> a monetary penalty for any space left out of order for both
shared
>>> spaces and
>>>>>> tenant spaces. If you're able to be an active and dedicated
>>> participant in that
>>>>>> committee, please join us on Slack.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This committee would also be able to spend some amount of Omni
funds
>>> to clean
>>>>>> the space regularly and keep it at a level of cleanliness that
must
>>> be
>>>>>> maintained for Omni to exist. Please check this out and get
back
>>> with any
>>>>>> thoughts, concerns, suggestions before it's voted on at the
next
>>> delegate's
>>>>>> meeting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Billy
>>>>>> Community Liberation Programs
>>>>>> _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss
mailing
>>> list -- sudo-discuss(a)sudoroom.org To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> sudo-discuss-leave(a)sudoroom.org More options at
>>>
https://sudoroom.org/lists/postorius/lists/sudo-discuss.sudoroom.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list -- sudo-discuss(a)sudoroom.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to sudo-discuss-leave(a)sudoroom.org
>>>>>> More options at
>>>
https://sudoroom.org/lists/postorius/lists/sudo-discuss.sudoroom.org/
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list -- sudo-discuss(a)sudoroom.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to sudo-discuss-leave(a)sudoroom.org
>>>>> More options at
>>>
https://sudoroom.org/lists/postorius/lists/sudo-discuss.sudoroom.org/
>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list -- sudo-discuss(a)sudoroom.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to sudo-discuss-leave(a)sudoroom.org
>>> More options at
>>>
https://sudoroom.org/lists/postorius/lists/sudo-discuss.sudoroom.org/
>>>
>>
>