Meeting Notes 2024-01-10 - Revision history

Jerkey: Undo revision 12381 by Jerkey (talk)

2024-01-15T04:48:31Z

Undo revision 12381 by Jerkey (talk)

Show changes

Jerkey: Reverted edits by Paigep (talk) to last revision by Jerkey

2024-01-15T00:32:08Z

Reverted edits by Paigep (talk) to last revision by Jerkey

Show changes

Paigep at 23:18, 11 January 2024

2024-01-11T23:18:06Z

Show changes

Paigep: /* vote on ed contract */

2024-01-11T22:52:44Z

vote on ed contract

Paigep at 22:48, 11 January 2024

2024-01-11T22:48:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:48, 11 January 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
			January 10, 202

	= Attendees =		= Attendees =
	== in person ==		== in person ==
Line 234:		Line 236:
	* paige - want to address elephant in room, maybe what is being passed around on laptop but idk. pallavi is someone we paid to be our fundraiser. there has been skepticism of pallavi, conspiracy that she is just here to get pp in. she said she cares a lot about racial justice. in meeting, letting this building get demolished came up, discussion about how that is a blatant form of gentrification. she was responding it would be racist if you didn't accept a black org in that context of foreclosure, she got fired up about racial equity. i had more discussion with her, she's in favor of counterproposals, not backing a full control thing. would have helped if you talked with her. not just "she called me racist now i'm attacked and cancelled". respect for pallavi, advising us more things we should be asking jamal. no lack of trust and wish people would talk to her wihout asking her to leave.		* paige - want to address elephant in room, maybe what is being passed around on laptop but idk. pallavi is someone we paid to be our fundraiser. there has been skepticism of pallavi, conspiracy that she is just here to get pp in. she said she cares a lot about racial justice. in meeting, letting this building get demolished came up, discussion about how that is a blatant form of gentrification. she was responding it would be racist if you didn't accept a black org in that context of foreclosure, she got fired up about racial equity. i had more discussion with her, she's in favor of counterproposals, not backing a full control thing. would have helped if you talked with her. not just "she called me racist now i'm attacked and cancelled". respect for pallavi, advising us more things we should be asking jamal. no lack of trust and wish people would talk to her wihout asking her to leave.
	* peter - work we do in here works really well with what they do out there. other grants we tap into if we can get act together. so much money we can tap in to. $130 million of state money available to tap into as a resilency hub. also we should look at this media lab proposal in context of gender equity issues. predominately female there. for no other reason, bring in that collective		* peter - work we do in here works really well with what they do out there. other grants we tap into if we can get act together. so much money we can tap in to. $130 million of state money available to tap into as a resilency hub. also we should look at this media lab proposal in context of gender equity issues. predominately female there. for no other reason, bring in that collective
	* muiren [in chat] - ~~yea media lab~~		* muiren [in chat] - Yeah Media Lab!
	* arthur - clarifying, rental in the basement? and that extra space also in the basement? are we voting on that?		* arthur - clarifying, rental in the basement? and that extra space also in the basement? are we voting on that?
	* paige - only voting on them occupying space they are already occupying. situation with money, a lot of leniency in rent. i.e. we gave someone $200 to move in, then later required to be paid more once set up and making funds. media lab paying $500, now want to pay $800 they expanded. i dont know if that was asked but i dont see it as a problem, it was unused uncared for space. $800 seems very fair. food not bombs paying $500 with closed door rooms. media lab has no closed doors. basement is $1/sq ft for no windows, $2/sq ft. with windows. area they want to be moving into at a later point of time is another area in the basement that is currently full of crap, so they would clean it up and pay $100 more for it. can show you the space if you want		* paige - only voting on them occupying space they are already occupying. situation with money is complicated, a lot of leniency in rent. i.e. we gave someone $200 to move in, then later required to be paid more once set up and making funds. media lab paying $500, now want to pay $800 they expanded. i dont know if that was asked but i dont see it as a problem, it was unused uncared for space. $800 seems very fair. food not bombs paying $500 with closed door rooms. media lab has no closed doors. basement is $1/sq ft for no windows, $2/sq ft. with windows. area they want to be moving into at a later point of time is another area in the basement that is currently full of crap, so they would clean it up and pay $100 more for it. can show you the space if you want
	* ed - can you describe what media lab does		* ed - can you describe what media lab does?
	* yar - they host sewing and jewelry and screenprint making workshops and other related artistic classes and workshops.		* yar - they host sewing and jewelry and screenprint making workshops and other related artistic classes and workshops.
	* peter - and Cece has aspirations to teach textile engineering down there, a whole element of workplace development, really interesting things, she's built parachutes for ZipLine which sends medical goods to third world countries		* peter - and Cece has aspirations to teach textile engineering down there, a whole element of workplace development, really interesting things, she's built parachutes for ZipLine which sends medical goods to third world countries
Line 246:		Line 248:
	* arlo - my name is arlo		* arlo - my name is arlo
	* jake - hold on he doesn't know the situation o just kidding		* jake - hold on he doesn't know the situation o just kidding
	* ally - anyone voting no? no one says no so passed.		* ally - anyone voting no? no one says no, so passed.
	*		Muirén [in chat] - My interest in Media Lab is Tech Couture, smart textiles, and using tech like intricate laser cut linoleum to print fabric.

	Muirén ~~(She, Her)~~
	~~Muirén (She, Her) says:Yeah Media Lab!~~
	~~Muirén (She, Her) says:~~My interest in Media Lab is Tech Couture, smart textiles, and using tech like intricate laser cut linoleum to print fabric. *

	== vote on ed contract ==		== vote on ed contract ==
Line 273:		Line 271:

	* vote no on this resolution?: 2		* vote no on this resolution?: 2
	* yar: vote no but not blocking. need to trust jamal to do what he needs to do. board by law would have authority to voerrride. no contract you can sign to take away delegate's right to do that.		* yar: vote no but not blocking. need to trust jamal to do what he needs to do. board by law would have authority to voerrride. no contract you can sign to take away delegate's right to do that.
	* another no		* another no
	* anwar - voting on a hypothetical, better to vote on a proposal ahead of us.		* anwar - voting on a hypothetical, better to vote on a proposal ahead of us.
Line 288:		Line 286:
	* jems - do not accept that apology. failure of 3 hours.		* jems - do not accept that apology. failure of 3 hours.
	* arthur - i have no trust in jems being a facilitator ever again. not how you build trust in front of new people		* arthur - i have no trust in jems being a facilitator ever again. not how you build trust in front of new people
	* eric - snaps		* eric - [snaps]
	* jems - trust has been destroyed. i have never met you, appreciate you showed up, stress of ~~parent i understand~~		* jems - trust has been destroyed. i have never met you, appreciate you showed up, also in context of the stress of parenting
	* arthur - you are lying		* arthur - you are lying
	* jems - dont appreciate your comments		* jems - dont appreciate your comments
Line 296:		Line 294:

	--- discontinuity, below notes are from much earlier ---		--- discontinuity, below notes are from much earlier ---
	~~3. sudo support decision for jake temporary ban?~~

	~~4. tomorrow's sudoroom delegate : paige and eric~~

			paige - explained pov
	paige - ~~expliained~~ pov		* jake - nobody can know what happened in that saturday meeting because dont know from notes
	* jake - nobody can know what happened in that meeting because dont know from notes
	* jake - also jemma shouldnt be facilitator because she accused me of racism, transphobia and misogyny since jake didn't want them to be facilitator		* jake - also jemma shouldnt be facilitator because she accused me of racism, transphobia and misogyny since jake didn't want them to be facilitator


	~~== Agenda item 1 ==~~

	~~== Agenda item 2 ==~~

Jerkey: Created page with "= Attendees = == in person == * paige: they/them been a delegate 4-5 times recently and first came in 2021 * alex - he/him * eric: answer. codelegate with paige * elon - first time yesterday * arthur - here often but my parenting schedule has never lined up * sierk * alex * jake * ccl - [who was this?] * ally - he/him not part of sudoroom but have been exploring omni commons. free store volunteer. ally as in alliance * peter - he/him * jason - he/him * yar - she/her, par..."

2024-01-11T22:43:51Z

Created page with "= Attendees = == in person == * paige: they/them been a delegate 4-5 times recently and first came in 2021 * alex - he/him * eric: answer. codelegate with paige * elon - first time yesterday * arthur - here often but my parenting schedule has never lined up * sierk * alex * jake * ccl - [who was this?] * ally - he/him not part of sudoroom but have been exploring omni commons. free store volunteer. ally as in alliance * peter - he/him * jason - he/him * yar - she/her, par..."

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:52, 11 January 2024
Line 255:		Line 255:
	* yar - our current safe space policy is anyone can ban other people. if threat of physical violence. people to not have to call the police. need to be able to shove people out of the building. i would hope jamal would still be able to do that. just want to say we all have ability to ban unilaterally		* yar - our current safe space policy is anyone can ban other people. if threat of physical violence. people to not have to call the police. need to be able to shove people out of the building. i would hope jamal would still be able to do that. just want to say we all have ability to ban unilaterally

	~~vote~~:		'''Vote:''' no ban power: resolve that sudoroom will not ratify any contract with any executive officer that confers ability to unilaterally ban people
	* no ban power: resolve that sudoroom will not ratify any contract with any executive officer that confers ability to unilaterally ban people

	* anwar - does it count if the banned person has the ability to appeal to the board		* anwar - does it count if the banned person has the ability to appeal to the board
Line 263:		Line 263:
	* arthur - can reach in who can		* arthur - can reach in who can
	* ally - from my limited understanding, jamal was the one who reversed the ban on jake. so seems it was not in his immediate interest		* ally - from my limited understanding, jamal was the one who reversed the ban on jake. so seems it was not in his immediate interest
	thomas - i feel that the process should be, you have to go to the group first, if someone is giving a problem and they're in that group, then you have to go to that group and ask them they have to take care of that person		* thomas - i feel that the process should be, you have to go to the group first, if someone is giving a problem and they're in that group, then you have to go to that group and ask them they have to take care of that person
	* paige - the omni commons has a conflict approval process, in order to ban ... delegates have power to ban then?*: 2/3 approval of the delegates. conflict stewards need to present at the meeting. there is a process already. we can't limit ~~them~~ to sudo, sometimes conflicts ~~don't get handled by a group~~.		* paige - the omni commons has a conflict approval process, in order to ban ... delegates have power to ban them: requires 2/3 approval of the delegates. conflict stewards need to present at the meeting. there is a process already. we can't limit ban discussions to sudo, sometimes conflicts are not isolated inside of one collective.
	* anwar - i disagree ~~wiht~~..		* anwar - i disagree the..
	* paige - conflict resolution policy as is does ~~denefit~~ the person who is a ~~ccused~~. the person accused gets to stick around in the ~~sace~~ and the people accusing have to go through this long drawn out process. find conflict steward and mediator, omni has ~~faileda t~~ that, no structure in place. a lot of conflict sessions. no group to collect all of these		* paige - conflict resolution policy as is does benefit the person who is a accused. the person accused gets to stick around in the space and the people accusing have to go through this long drawn out process. find conflict steward and mediator, omni has facilitated that, no structure in place. a lot of conflict sessions. no group to collect all of these
	* ally - people don't come to meetings because there si no mediation. not comfortable having these one on one meetings, nobody who is a mediator, stressful role, have to be trusted by both people, not some rando either, then 3-4 hour public ~~mettings~~, time both peopel feel somewhat safe and seen.		* ally - people don't come to meetings because there if there is no mediation. not comfortable having these one on one meetings, nobody who is a mediator, stressful role, have to be trusted by both people, not some rando either, then 3-4 hour public meetings, time both peopel feel somewhat safe and seen.
	* ~~sequioa~~ - i was going to say, this experience means we need a clear process for conflict resolution. i want to say 3 plus hours. we can say ed cant have unilateral ban power. clearly delineated and approved plan for conflict resolution that ~~coud~~ result in ban ~~afte~~ process in completed. agree no unilateral ban power. should we resolve that we will in the future develop a better ban process in the future?. ask to be done with the meeting		* sequoia - i was going to say, this experience means we need a clear process for conflict resolution. i want to say we've been here 3 plus hours. we can say ed cant have unilateral ban power. clearly delineated and approved plan for conflict resolution that could result in ban after process in completed. agree no unilateral ban power. should we resolve that we will in the future develop a better ban process in the future?. ask to be done with the meeting

	* vote no on this resolution?: 2		* vote no on this resolution?: 2
	* yar: vote no but not blocking. need to trust jamal to do what he needs to do. board by law would have authority to ~~voerrride~~. no contract you can sign to take away delegate's right to do that.		* yar: vote no but not blocking. need to trust jamal to do what he needs to do. board by law would have authority to override. no contract you can sign to take away delegate's right to do that.
	* another no		* another no
	* anwar - voting on a hypothetical, better to vote on a proposal ahead of us.		* anwar - voting on a hypothetical, better to vote on a proposal ahead of us.
	* thomas - we are voting on guidance		* thomas - we are voting on guidance for the delegate
	* if you're going to say that anyone can ~~unilaterall~~ ban anyone then that applied to jamal.		* if you're going to say that anyone can unilateral ban anyone then that applied to jamal.
	* ally - i think its important, very basic things are lacking. what is the default? majority voting not even clear in sudo room. two urgent issues happening tomorrow, i think it would it would be possible to have quicker response. then afterwards people who want to stay can stay to discuss the minutia. no structure like that established. imminent urgent voting.		* ally - i think its important, very basic things are lacking. what is the default? majority voting not even clear in sudo room. two urgent issues happening tomorrow, i think it would it would be possible to have quicker response. then afterwards people who want to stay can stay to discuss the minutia. no structure like that established. imminent urgent voting.
	* alex - well jamal was here for earlier part of meeting		* alex - well jamal was here for earlier part of meeting
	* yar - if you are ~~goign~~ to block a facilitator, you should have someone ready to come in		* yar - if you are going to block a facilitator, you should have someone ready to come in
	* jems - i have facilitated before and kept us on time. i got help, we have long topics. i should have been facilitator after majority vote.		* jems - i have facilitated before and kept us on time. i got help, we have long topics. i should have been facilitator after majority vote.
	* peter - every day we dawdle, options close in. i asked for status update on the finances. there is a finance meeting that you can come to. we need ~~everyones a~~ game about how we figure out how to save this building		* peter - every day we dawdle, options close in. i asked for status update on the finances. there is a finance meeting that you can come to. we need everyone's A game about how we figure out how to save this building
	* jake - apologize to jems for them being harmed by my objection to them being facilitator. still stand by my decision. sorry you were harmed.		* jake - apologize to jems for them being harmed by my objection to them being facilitator. still stand by my decision. sorry you were harmed.
	* yar - what are you apologizing for		* yar - what are you apologizing for
Line 293:		Line 292:
	* ally - this is spiraling. this should mediating. we should end meeting but people who want to stay should stay.		* ally - this is spiraling. this should mediating. we should end meeting but people who want to stay should stay.

	~~---~~ discontinuity, below notes are from much earlier ~~---~~		=== discontinuity, below notes are from much earlier ===

	paige - explained pov		paige - explained pov
	* jake - nobody can know what happened in that saturday meeting because dont know from notes		* jake - nobody can know what happened in that saturday meeting because dont know from notes
	* jake - also jemma shouldnt be facilitator because she accused me of racism, transphobia and misogyny since jake didn't want them to be facilitator		* jake - also jemma shouldnt be facilitator because she accused me of racism, transphobia and misogyny since jake didn't want them to be facilitator