24 Mar
2014
24 Mar
'14
8:55 p.m.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Danny Spitzberg <stationaery(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm currently renewing my HUB membership (already
3 years in, a really open-minded organizer is has their community engagement
role) and was prompted to click agree/disagree with the following:
[snip]
So, my question: has there been any discussion around membership
recruitment/ retention/ rebooting?
I added this to our meeting agenda on a whim. Most of the discussion
was me being bitter about their co-option of language. Hol had the
quote of the night: "they're ctrl-v-ing the hell out of us", referring
to the Kopimist cut-and-paste mantra.
I'd always been skeptical of them. Their fundraiser got 100k in one
night, and they charge $400/month for their co-working space. They
have paid positions, and their leadership appears hierarchical and
opaque. For example, there is no mailing list, only a glitzy
"newsletter". While I was inspired by their hosting Oakland Data Day,
I felt most of the value came from volunteer attendees. In other
words, where is that money going?
This ridiculous video didn't help me take the "impact hub" concept
seriously: http://vimeo.com/35373512
Put simply, Sudoroom is a grassroots organization and always will be.
Our ultimate goal is to serve our communities. I believe the HUB's
ultimate goal is to extract rent from our communities.
After reading on Oakland Wiki yesterday that their building is owned
by Signature, the same developers behind Brooklyn Basin, I believe all
hypothetical good faith I had in that project has vanished. It's
marketing, marketing, marketing. You could argue the HUB is not their
landlord, but then why are they naming their new building complex "The
Hive"? It turns out this "hive" also includes the 5 story condo
building a block from Sudo that has literally had a "now selling" sign
since we moved in two years ago. This is absolutely a collaboration
between speculators and gentrifiers in my mind, and I think it is
extremely gross and fucked up.
To be honest, I think we'd be very wise as an organization to
explicitly distance ourselves from these kinds of projects.
26 Mar
26 Mar
9:39 a.m.
New subject: membership reboot?
While I agree with concerns about top-down ownership, I think it is important to recognize
their success in regards to diversity. Both in terms of who works there during the day and
the kind of events they hold, I have been impressed by how connected the place is to the
community - at any point in time you'll see a majority of people of color and more
often more women than men - both areas in which Sudo Room has struggled with since its
inception.
Additionally, I think there may be some misunderstanding about what having an open
knowledge, commons-oriented set of agreements. The logic of open knowledge systems is to
celebrate the spread of these norms as they become more widely adopted - concern about
'copying and pasting' seem to perpetuate an exclusive rights kind of thinking.
On Mar 24, 2014, at 8:55 PM, Yar wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Danny Spitzberg
<stationaery(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm currently renewing my HUB membership
(already
3 years in, a really open-minded organizer is has their community engagement
role) and was prompted to click agree/disagree with the following:
[snip]
So, my question: has there been any discussion around membership
recruitment/ retention/ rebooting?
I added this to our meeting agenda on a whim. Most of the discussion
was me being bitter about their co-option of language. Hol had the
quote of the night: "they're ctrl-v-ing the hell out of us", referring
to the Kopimist cut-and-paste mantra.
I'd always been skeptical of them. Their fundraiser got 100k in one
night, and they charge $400/month for their co-working space. They
have paid positions, and their leadership appears hierarchical and
opaque. For example, there is no mailing list, only a glitzy
"newsletter". While I was inspired by their hosting Oakland Data Day,
I felt most of the value came from volunteer attendees. In other
words, where is that money going?
This ridiculous video didn't help me take the "impact hub" concept
seriously: http://vimeo.com/35373512
Put simply, Sudoroom is a grassroots organization and always will be.
Our ultimate goal is to serve our communities. I believe the HUB's
ultimate goal is to extract rent from our communities.
After reading on Oakland Wiki yesterday that their building is owned
by Signature, the same developers behind Brooklyn Basin, I believe all
hypothetical good faith I had in that project has vanished. It's
marketing, marketing, marketing. You could argue the HUB is not their
landlord, but then why are they naming their new building complex "The
Hive"? It turns out this "hive" also includes the 5 story condo
building a block from Sudo that has literally had a "now selling" sign
since we moved in two years ago. This is absolutely a collaboration
between speculators and gentrifiers in my mind, and I think it is
extremely gross and fucked up.
To be honest, I think we'd be very wise as an organization to
explicitly distance ourselves from these kinds of projects.
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss 
27 Mar
27 Mar
9:25 a.m.
New subject: membership reboot?
Eddan's got it right:
"Additionally, I think there may be some misunderstanding about what having
an open knowledge, commons-oriented set of agreements. The logic of open
knowledge systems is to celebrate the spread of these norms as they become
more widely adopted - concern about 'copying and pasting' seem to
perpetuate an exclusive rights kind of thinking."
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:39 AM, eddan.com <eddan(a)sudoroom.tv> wrote:
While I agree with concerns about top-down ownership,
I think it is
important to recognize their success in regards to diversity. Both in terms
of who works there during the day and the kind of events they hold, I have
been impressed by how connected the place is to the community - at any
point in time you'll see a majority of people of color and more often more
women than men - both areas in which Sudo Room has struggled with since its
inception.
Additionally, I think there may be some misunderstanding about what having
an open knowledge, commons-oriented set of agreements. The logic of open
knowledge systems is to celebrate the spread of these norms as they become
more widely adopted - concern about 'copying and pasting' seem to
perpetuate an exclusive rights kind of thinking.
On Mar 24, 2014, at 8:55 PM, Yar wrote:
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Danny Spitzberg
<stationaery(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> I'm currently renewing my HUB membership
(already
> 3 years in, a really open-minded organizer is has their community
engagement
role) and
was prompted to click agree/disagree with the following:
[snip]
So, my question: has there been any discussion around membership
recruitment/ retention/ rebooting?
I added this to our meeting agenda on a whim. Most of the discussion
was me being bitter about their co-option of language. Hol had the
quote of the night: "they're ctrl-v-ing the hell out of us", referring
to the Kopimist cut-and-paste mantra.
I'd always been skeptical of them. Their fundraiser got 100k in one
night, and they charge $400/month for their co-working space. They
have paid positions, and their leadership appears hierarchical and
opaque. For example, there is no mailing list, only a glitzy
"newsletter". While I was inspired by their hosting Oakland Data Day,
I felt most of the value came from volunteer attendees. In other
words, where is that money going?
This ridiculous video didn't help me take the "impact hub" concept
seriously: http://vimeo.com/35373512
Put simply, Sudoroom is a grassroots organization and always will be.
Our ultimate goal is to serve our communities. I believe the HUB's
ultimate goal is to extract rent from our communities.
After reading on Oakland Wiki yesterday that their building is owned
by Signature, the same developers behind Brooklyn Basin, I believe all
hypothetical good faith I had in that project has vanished. It's
marketing, marketing, marketing. You could argue the HUB is not their
landlord, but then why are they naming their new building complex "The
Hive"? It turns out this "hive" also includes the 5 story condo
building a block from Sudo that has literally had a "now selling" sign
since we moved in two years ago. This is absolutely a collaboration
between speculators and gentrifiers in my mind, and I think it is
extremely gross and fucked up.
To be honest, I think we'd be very wise as an organization to
explicitly distance ourselves from these kinds of projects.
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss 
28 Mar
28 Mar
1 a.m.
New subject: membership reboot?
Im not entirely up on this 'Hub', but in my view, the economic question is
still being invisibilized. At 400 a month, who exactly is being served by
this Hub in our community? Employing people of color and having gender
balance, while great, does not address this question, namely the question
of creating a space for everyone including poor people, regardless if
creed, who could buy one laptop a month at that price.
When they opened, i swung by to find out what they were all about. I asked
if the woman of color behind the counter if they were a nonprofit, to which
she replied: "Oh no. We are DEFINITELY for-profit'. I remember coming into
Sudo and telling that to Anthony..
I worry that what we're seeing here is a way another way to monetize social
space, the IRL social space of hackers and the traditional subculture that
attends it. Its funny because I feel like bay area hackerspaces effervesced
in part as a response to the appropriation and corporatization of hacker
culture in the workplace, ie the viral business model adoption of 'startup
culture'. Now, hackerspaces themselves, once refuges of sorts, are being
recuperated (in the Situationist reading) or mythologized (in a
structuralist, Barthes-ian reading) by these same forces. Except that
theyre not hackerspaces, theyre 'co-working' spaces.. spaces with no
culture, except the fukture of work - finding work, 'networking', making
yourself more marketable - nothing 'wrong' with that per se, except that
its also a subtle if effective reframing of hacker culture into one thats
perhaps entirely framed by money and capital and helping yourself, rather
than learning cause its just fun, or helping others, or caring..or about
community in the traditional sense.
Ie it serms to me, albiet from afar, thst its far more a business, than a
community; a model, not a culture; about helping yourself, rather than
helping others.
Thats my worry anyway - not a critique as such, just my worry.
On Thursday, March 27, 2014, Jehan Tremback <jehan.tremback(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Eddan's got it right:
"Additionally, I think there may be some misunderstanding about what
having an open knowledge, commons-oriented set of agreements. The logic of
open knowledge systems is to celebrate the spread of these norms as they
become more widely adopted - concern about 'copying and pasting' seem to
perpetuate an exclusive rights kind of thinking."
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:39 AM, eddan.com
<eddan@sudoroom.tv<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','eddan@sudoroom.tv');>
wrote:
While I agree with concerns about top-down
ownership, I think it is
important to recognize their success in regards to diversity. Both in terms
of who works there during the day and the kind of events they hold, I have
been impressed by how connected the place is to the community - at any
point in time you'll see a majority of people of color and more often more
women than men - both areas in which Sudo Room has struggled with since its
inception.
Additionally, I think there may be some misunderstanding about what
having an open knowledge, commons-oriented set of agreements. The logic of
open knowledge systems is to celebrate the spread of these norms as they
become more widely adopted - concern about 'copying and pasting' seem to
perpetuate an exclusive rights kind of thinking.
On Mar 24, 2014, at 8:55 PM, Yar wrote:
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org');>
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Danny Spitzberg
<stationaery@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','stationaery@gmail.com');>>
wrote:
> I'm currently renewing my HUB membership
(already
> 3 years in, a really open-minded organizer is has their community
engagement
role) and
was prompted to click agree/disagree with the following:
[snip]
So, my question: has there been any discussion around membership
recruitment/ retention/ rebooting?
I added this to our meeting agenda on a whim. Most of the discussion
was me being bitter about their co-option of language. Hol had the
quote of the night: "they're ctrl-v-ing the hell out of us", referring
to the Kopimist cut-and-paste mantra.
I'd always been skeptical of them. Their fundraiser got 100k in one
night, and they charge $400/month for their co-working space. They
have paid positions, and their leadership appears hierarchical and
opaque. For example, there is no mailing list, only a glitzy
"newsletter". While I was inspired by their hosting Oakland Data Day,
I felt most of the value came from volunteer attendees. In other
words, where is that money going?
This ridiculous video didn't help me take the "impact hub" concept
seriously: http://vimeo.com/35373512
Put simply, Sudoroom is a grassroots organization and always will be.
Our ultimate goal is to serve our communities. I believe the HUB's
ultimate goal is to extract rent from our communities.
After reading on Oakland Wiki yesterday that their building is owned
by Signature, the same developers behind Brooklyn Basin, I believe all
hypothetical good faith I had in that project has vanished. It's
marketing, marketing, marketing. You could argue the HUB is not their
landlord, but then why are they naming their new building complex "The
Hive"? It turns out this "hive" also includes the 5 story condo
building a block from Sudo that has literally had a "now selling" sign
since we moved in two years ago. This is absolutely a collaboration
between speculators and gentrifiers in my mind, and I think it is
extremely gross and fucked up.
To be honest, I think we'd be very wise as an organization to
explicitly distance ourselves from these kinds of projects.
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org');>
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss 
10:21 a.m.
New subject: membership reboot?
I also don't really know much about the hub, beyond the discussion here.
But, I want to comment about the idea that "hacker culture" is something
that is being appropriated. Pretty much every aspect of "hacker culture"
was appropriated a long time ago.
For example, if you are talking about the Steven Levy's Hackers (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackers:_Heroes_of_the_Computer_Revolution )
or more specifically the TMRC MIT "hackers" who coined the word, keep in
mind that these people were in college. They didn't have real jobs, not out
of some ethic, but because they were full time college students at MIT.
Sure some of the original og hackers championed the free software movement
and famously spoke out against one of their own, Bill Gates, deciding to
make money form code (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists), but in the end
a lot of the computer hobbyists joined huge corporations
or ended up helping to start them. The idea of a start-up needing a
"visionary" and a "hacker" isn't a modern .com concept, it started
with
Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, Bill Gates and Paul Allen, and ended up
amassing some of the largest fortunes on the planet.
If you are taking about the "hackers" who broke in computer systems (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_computer_security_hacker_history).
These people quickly became obsessed with attention and status. Which
eventual lead to huge arrests in the 90's (much like we saw recently with
luzsec), movies like Wargames and Hackers, and a twisted (in my view) ethic
that says that white hat hacking (hacking for corporations or the
government) is somehow more ethical than hacking in the spirit of
exploration and/or activism ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvXk5xCM6PM ).
Hacker spaces came originally out of this second group, btw, with the most
famous example being The L0pht (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L0pht ) which
started as a space for exploration, but quickly became a company for profit.
So lets not pretend that hacker culture is somthing pure and innocent we
need to protect at all costs. Do what you do, create new movements and
spaces, but the idea that we need to protect hacker culture is something
that would have been nice to have in 1976, but today doesn't really have
any meaning, at least in my view.
--Andrew
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:00 AM, David Keenan <dkeenan44(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Im not entirely up on this 'Hub', but in my
view, the economic question is
still being invisibilized. At 400 a month, who exactly is being served by
this Hub in our community? Employing people of color and having gender
balance, while great, does not address this question, namely the question
of creating a space for everyone including poor people, regardless if
creed, who could buy one laptop a month at that price.
When they opened, i swung by to find out what they were all about. I asked
if the woman of color behind the counter if they were a nonprofit, to which
she replied: "Oh no. We are DEFINITELY for-profit'. I remember coming into
Sudo and telling that to Anthony..
I worry that what we're seeing here is a way another way to monetize
social space, the IRL social space of hackers and the
traditional subculture that attends it. Its funny because I feel like bay
area hackerspaces effervesced in part as a response to the appropriation
and corporatization of hacker culture in the workplace, ie the viral
business model adoption of 'startup culture'. Now, hackerspaces themselves,
once refuges of sorts, are being recuperated (in the Situationist reading)
or mythologized (in a structuralist, Barthes-ian reading) by these same
forces. Except that theyre not hackerspaces, theyre 'co-working' spaces..
spaces with no culture, except the fukture of work - finding work,
'networking', making yourself more marketable - nothing 'wrong' with
that
per se, except that its also a subtle if effective reframing of hacker
culture into one thats perhaps entirely framed by money and capital and
helping yourself, rather than learning cause its just fun, or helping
others, or caring..or about community in the traditional sense.
Ie it serms to me, albiet from afar, thst its far more a business, than a
community; a model, not a culture; about helping yourself, rather than
helping others.
Thats my worry anyway - not a critique as such, just my worry.
On Thursday, March 27, 2014, Jehan Tremback <jehan.tremback(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
--
-------
Andrew Lowe
Cell: 831-332-2507
http://roshambomedia.com
Eddan's got it right:
"Additionally, I think there may be some misunderstanding about what
having an open knowledge, commons-oriented set of agreements. The logic of
open knowledge systems is to celebrate the spread of these norms as they
become more widely adopted - concern about 'copying and pasting' seem to
perpetuate an exclusive rights kind of thinking."
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:39 AM, eddan.com <eddan(a)sudoroom.tv> wrote:
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
While I agree with concerns about top-down
ownership, I think it is
important to recognize their success in regards to diversity. Both in terms
of who works there during the day and the kind of events they hold, I have
been impressed by how connected the place is to the community - at any
point in time you'll see a majority of people of color and more often more
women than men - both areas in which Sudo Room has struggled with since its
inception.
Additionally, I think there may be some misunderstanding about what
having an open knowledge, commons-oriented set of agreements. The logic of
open knowledge systems is to celebrate the spread of these norms as they
become more widely adopted - concern about 'copying and pasting' seem to
perpetuate an exclusive rights kind of thinking.
On Mar 24, 2014, at 8:55 PM, Yar wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Danny Spitzberg
<
stationaery(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm currently renewing my HUB membership
(already
> 3 years in, a really open-minded organizer is has their community
engagement
> role) and was prompted to click
agree/disagree with the following:
>
> [snip]
>
> So, my question: has there been any discussion around membership
> recruitment/ retention/ rebooting?
I added this to our meeting agenda on a whim. Most of the discussion
was me being bitter about their co-option of language. Hol had the
quote of the night: "they're ctrl-v-ing the hell out of us", referring
to the Kopimist cut-and-paste mantra.
I'd always been skeptical of them. Their fundraiser got 100k in one
night, and they charge $400/month for their co-working space. They
have paid positions, and their leadership appears hierarchical and
opaque. For example, there is no mailing list, only a glitzy
"newsletter". While I was inspired by their hosting Oakland Data Day,
I felt most of the value came from volunteer attendees. In other
words, where is that money going?
This ridiculous video didn't help me take the "impact hub" concept
seriously: http://vimeo.com/35373512
Put simply, Sudoroom is a grassroots organization and always will be.
Our ultimate goal is to serve our communities. I believe the HUB's
ultimate goal is to extract rent from our communities.
After reading on Oakland Wiki yesterday that their building is owned
by Signature, the same developers behind Brooklyn Basin, I believe all
hypothetical good faith I had in that project has vanished. It's
marketing, marketing, marketing. You could argue the HUB is not their
landlord, but then why are they naming their new building complex "The
Hive"? It turns out this "hive" also includes the 5 story condo
building a block from Sudo that has literally had a "now selling" sign
since we moved in two years ago. This is absolutely a collaboration
between speculators and gentrifiers in my mind, and I think it is
extremely gross and fucked up.
To be honest, I think we'd be very wise as an organization to
explicitly distance ourselves from these kinds of projects.
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
26 Mar
26 Mar
5:31 p.m.
New subject: membership reboot?
> While I was inspired by their hosting Oakland Data
Day
For the record, Oakland Data Day WAS NOT hosted by The Hub. It was
organized and administered by OpenOakland, the Code for America brigade in
our fair city. The Hub was merely the venue we could get, and they were
gracious enough to provide it.
I was there as an OO volunteer that day, and for the record, found The Hub
staff more than pleasant. Indeed, they were thoroughly supportive and
delightful to work with. Of course, these folks were not from The Hub;s
hierarchy, and your mileage may vary.
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:55 PM, Yar <yardenack(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Danny Spitzberg
<stationaery(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
--
Tony Barreca
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/tonybarreca
Skype: tonybarreca
Twitter: tbarreca
Mobile: (510) 710-5864
I'm currently renewing my HUB membership
(already
3 years in, a really open-minded organizer is has their community
engagement
role) and was prompted to click agree/disagree
with the following:
[snip]
So, my question: has there been any discussion around membership
recruitment/ retention/ rebooting?
I added this to our meeting agenda on a whim. Most of the discussion
was me being bitter about their co-option of language. Hol had the
quote of the night: "they're ctrl-v-ing the hell out of us", referring
to the Kopimist cut-and-paste mantra.
I'd always been skeptical of them. Their fundraiser got 100k in one
night, and they charge $400/month for their co-working space. They
have paid positions, and their leadership appears hierarchical and
opaque. For example, there is no mailing list, only a glitzy
"newsletter". While I was inspired by their hosting Oakland Data Day,
I felt most of the value came from volunteer attendees. In other
words, where is that money going?
This ridiculous video didn't help me take the "impact hub" concept
seriously: http://vimeo.com/35373512
Put simply, Sudoroom is a grassroots organization and always will be.
Our ultimate goal is to serve our communities. I believe the HUB's
ultimate goal is to extract rent from our communities.
After reading on Oakland Wiki yesterday that their building is owned
by Signature, the same developers behind Brooklyn Basin, I believe all
hypothetical good faith I had in that project has vanished. It's
marketing, marketing, marketing. You could argue the HUB is not their
landlord, but then why are they naming their new building complex "The
Hive"? It turns out this "hive" also includes the 5 story condo
building a block from Sudo that has literally had a "now selling" sign
since we moved in two years ago. This is absolutely a collaboration
between speculators and gentrifiers in my mind, and I think it is
extremely gross and fucked up.
To be honest, I think we'd be very wise as an organization to
explicitly distance ourselves from these kinds of projects.
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
3688
days inactive
3691
days old
5 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Andrew -
David Keenan -
eddan.com -
Jehan Tremback -
Tony Barreca -
Yar