15 May
2015
15 May
'15
6:02 p.m.
I would be wary, sudo, of how few people it already takes to have quorum,
and if that changes...
A small clique of friends can be at a meeting, and make decisions for all
of sudo.
It's a broken system.
Our leaders can either say
"there's the power, don't give it to anyone, let's split it
consciously"
or
"where's the power? i don't see it"
the latter is falsity in my opinion, it deters you from taking any
the former is truth.
I think 1-vote-per-member; remotely solicited when live-vote isn't
possible, is a much sounder way of representing the opinions and needs of
many people.
to my eyes, consensus seems to be closer to high school social dynamics
than a step in political evolution. i'm definitely disillusioned about
consensus after seeing this project.
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 3:30 PM, danarauz(a)gmail.com <danarauz(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
--
<3 Rachel
15 May
15 May
6:13 p.m.
New subject: Omni Commons Delegates for the Sudo Room
Quorum takes 10 people. I really don't consider that a small group.
I personally think that voting creates a tyranny of the majority which
inherently oppresses minority groups. In a democracy, minorities have to
hope for the benevolence of the majority to deign to stoop down low enough
to recognize them as people.
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Rachel Wolfsohn <rawjnana(a)gmail.com> wrote:
6:18 p.m.
New subject: Omni Commons Delegates for the Sudo Room
Also, there's a really obvious answer to this fear of cliques.
Show up to meetings.
All members have blocking power. Yay consensus.
If you're unhappy with a proposal that was passed, make a counter-proposal.
Nothing is set in stone. sudo's policies can change very quickly. We're not
waterfall; we're agile. It's better to deploy our changes regularly,
knowing we can further build on these features than make sure they're
perfect when the race starts.
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Ryan <yandoryn(a)gmail.com> wrote:
6:41 p.m.
New subject: Omni Commons Delegates for the Sudo Room
blocking can work. but then someone could block forever something that's
reasonable to the majority. there's always a limit, not always gonna make
everyone happy. limitations on blocking could prevent this, yes.
bc ppl don't always agree, the higher a percentage is for the required the
majority, the closer it is to consensus, the system is leaving behind the
few rather than the silent, if voting is required. when consensus rules,
the loud and confident can get away with murder, esp if those in disaccord
happen to be busy at the vet or something...
just my belief. consensus won't actually work for the real world- only for
a small place of play/leisure, really. where a small group already
generally agrees with each other or shares personal interests.
yeah, showing up to meetings is an answer. when you can.
as people who know Power know well, once something is in effect, it takes
a lot more to get people to change it,
... bc there's a perception of there having been agreement by so many in
the first place, rather than a small group.
Example:
the U.S. gov't's structure. It was created by merely dozens of people, for
millions, one day hundreds of millions, of people
and honestly, it takes faith in a system to participate in it. faith i
don't have in any system but that of family, true loyal unstructured
unsolicited solidarity, and a universal spirit, at the moment.
P.S i've heard talk from sudo's founders about lessening quorum to seven.
because attendance is so low. running sudo is already left in the hands of
it's founders. perhaps more than you all realize, people don't want to step
on your toes...
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Ryan <yandoryn(a)gmail.com> wrote:
--
<3 Rachel
6:52 p.m.
New subject: Omni Commons Delegates for the Sudo Room
Consistent unreasonable blocking is a quick way to find yourself as a
member in bad standing. Blocking isn't meant to be a punitive thing... it's
supposed to be a good way to show how serious something is, so amendments
can be made or discussion can go forward as to why this is a blocking
concern at all.
We have talked about lowering quorum to seven, but it's never gone through
because we've come to the conclusion that it's better to try and up meeting
attendance rather than reduce quorum.
If you don't have faith in sudo's system, you don't have to participate.
That's not to say that people wouldn't be sad to see you go, but it's
always an option. If you're finding yourself disillusioned or not agreeing
with sudo's core politics, there are other hackerspaces out there. The Bay
Area has a ton! Maybe you can find one that aligns with you better. As a
moderator of a heavily used web app, I have to remind people of this
constantly. Not every community is for everyone. It'd be kind of messed up
if that were the case.
Honestly, it sounds like you're having issues with the Omni at large in
general. Maybe it's just not working out. Maybe you need to take a break
and assess if this is the right community for you after all.
You also have the option of not participating in the system if you don't
have faith in it, without stopping being part of the community. There are a
lot of folks at sudo and the Omni who don't get deep into the politics or
the day-to-day workings. And that's okay. They shouldn't have to be
involved on that level if they don't want to be.
If you do want to change something, though, and missed a meeting because of
an emergency or a double-booking, again, you are welcome to submit a
counter-proposal.
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Rachel Wolfsohn <rawjnana(a)gmail.com> wrote:
7:17 p.m.
New subject: Omni Commons Delegates for the Sudo Room
Very true, there are plenty of other hackerspaces
But sadly, there are few Commons spaces. Few Public spaces. And Sudo is
part of a project that wants to be a Commons, open to the public.
Alas, I hope this whole land is made of truly communal, public spaces,
within my lifetime.
And when that time comes, that people are ready for real change, it will be
confidence, outspokenness and respect that leads people, as it always was.
Which would you choose? Law-given freedom? The freedom allotted by
resources held? Or inherent freedom?
I officially give up on trying to fix any fucking system. Please, enjoy. :)
I'm grateful really. It was about time I snapped out of it; the illusion
that living within social structures, even in full-frontal-truth, can
actually make a difference.
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Ryan <yandoryn(a)gmail.com> wrote:
--
<3 Rachel
7:25 p.m.
New subject: Omni Commons Delegates for the Sudo Room
I love you too, Ryan. I def wanna visit with you soon (not at omni)
But, what decision? What decision is it I'm supposed to be making?
People aren't always right or fair, and trying to make it that way is
futile. It's a dog-eat-dog world. I've spent my whole life trying to draw
the line where I say "this is us, these other people and i are part of each
other" as far and wide as i can. i still choose compassion and mercy over
punishment or control any day- but i have way less faith in people at omni
and at colleges than i did when i was living on the street. way less.
but it just leads me to see ppl with good hearts play out the same bs
selfish people do; and people either being broken or breaking something.
i'd rather break something than be broken, and i'm gonna try to live more
like jon stark than a greek muse
much much love for you,
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Ryan <yandoryn(a)gmail.com> wrote:
--
<3 Rachel
7:30 p.m.
New subject: Omni Commons Delegates for the Sudo Room
The decision of how to move forward. The decision to engage, disengage,
engage less, engage elsewhere, engage louder, engage more often... There
are a myriad of choices to how you want to go forward. In the end, you
should do whatever you feel is best for you and your well-being. That's not
selfish... if you keep crumbling apart like this because you're not meshing
with this community, you won't be able enact change elsewhere.
Like you said, you'd rather break something than be broken.
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Rachel Wolfsohn <rawjnana(a)gmail.com> wrote:
18 May
18 May
1:33 p.m.
New subject: Omni Commons Delegates for the Sudo Room
To clarify, I brought this up because I plan to be more active as liaison
between the sudo room membership and the other omni commons collectives,
especially by participating in our spokescouncil. I asked the group at our
weekly meeting to help me clarify who the active delegates are so I could
send an announcement to everyone so they know who they can talk to about
omni commons-related things. Further, I wanted to clarify a process for how
others can participate.
The path to participation is clear, the channels of communication are
clear, our ability to improve transparency and accountability is clear in
my original message.
Let me know if there are any other concerns or questions.
// Matt
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Ryan <yandoryn(a)gmail.com> wrote:
3629
days inactive
3631
days old
9 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Matthew Senate -
Rachel Wolfsohn -
Ryan