I was listening to the Noisebridge tour sent by Vicky and it seems like their membership process is a little more formalized.  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@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@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@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@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@lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss


_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss





--
Cheers,

Rusty Lindgren





_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss