[sudo-discuss] [omni-discuss] Accessibility Liaison?

Tue Apr 21 12:19:31 PDT 2015

The omni is a place a lot of work gets done, its more of an adult work/play
environment than a community center. That work includes heavy machinery, riskier
than chill activities, and chemicals...

That being said, I think we'll only be successful in the neighborhood if we try
to act more like a community center...

Wheres the line of balance? Depends on what omninoms can and will do to
accommodate different cases. We can only do so much. I wish we could do it
all...

<3

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:10 PM, niki < niki.shelley at gmail.com [niki.shelley at gmail.com] > wrote:
I actually *do* believe that this can be dealt with in a practical and
reasonable way which is why I put this to the list.
I admit exasperation, however, with the critique that the community just doesn't
care enough / is not sufficiently interested in making the space accessible.
The community is not some amorphous / boundless resource *nor* is it some
perfect ideological object.
It's real human beings in real space / time navigating all manner of confusing /
complicated relationships.
I guess I was hoping that someone would be interested in assisting with
addressing these concerns practically even if it's only to identify what we can
/ cannot do rather than simply write it off as yet one more way in which we're
failing every day to live up to our "values".
I think it's reasonable to say that we haven't found someone who has the time /
energy to take this on right now and that people who have concerns around these
issues should perhaps wait to engage with us until we're in a more solid place.

N

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Brad Borevitz < brad.borevitz at gmail.com [brad.borevitz at gmail.com] > wrote:
can these issues be dealt with in a practical and reasonable way without
resorting to the exasperated cop out reference to ideological perfectionism? and
why all the antagonism?

if there are limited resources (and there are) then real issues need to be
prioritized and dealt with in turn according to some sense of what is most
important and what effects the most people. can the case be made that addressing
chemical sensitivity is urgent and should be prioritized over other concerns?

chemical sensitivity is a controversial diagnosis without support from science
based medical organizations like AMA or WHO. i don’t know much about it but from
a quick wikipedia search it looks like there is some evidence that it can be
psychosomatic. which is not to say it isn’t real or current science could be
wrong, just that there doesn’t now seem to be any consensus or compelling
evidence. that might explain some people’s dismissal.

but if there are potentially dangerous chemicals (maybe occupational health as
safety regulations should be a guide here) being used around the omni without
adequate ventilation and without informing people of where and when they might
be exposed to these, that seems like an immediate issue. at the very least those
using such chemicals, should have an obligation to notify others (signs and
disclosure to omni general meeting) and a making a plan to isolate, mitigate and
provide necessary ventilation.

and if perfume bothers people then those using it should be made aware and act
with some consideration of other people around them. it’s just like being loud.
in a crowded space that is shared without good ways to partition and isolate
activities, we should be aware of the way we effect each other as we use the
space. these distractions, though they may be at the level of annoyance rather
than emergency, have real effects on the ability of the space to be effectively
shared. take them seriously, but don’t exaggerate their significance by making
them emotionally laden contests over control, authority, attention ...

b

On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:52 AM, niki < niki.shelley at gmail.com [niki.shelley at gmail.com] > wrote:

> Ok. I will write her back and tell her that because not every person who
enters the doors of the Omni is able to occupy a place of absolutely pure
ideological perfection, we will not be addressing these issues in any meaningful
way.
>
> N
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:31 PM, Ryan < yandoryn at gmail.com [yandoryn at gmail.com] > wrote:
> It's not just one person or one situation. And it's not always in an
aggressive way. And it's not just an issue of not caring (although I have
experienced that). It's an issue of feasibility.
>
> I've heard snowball arguments. I know that Material Print Machine tries their
hardest to be chemically sensitive but cannot function without some volatile
chemicals that can cause problems.
>
> If we got some serious ventilation going on, maybe we'd be able to deal with
CCL and sudo. But the 3D printers could be an issue.
>
> And the few times I've tried to broach this subject, I have hit hard walls.
I've also had a lot of support. But I've also heard a lot of people basically
say "it'd be too hard to care about such a small minority."
>
> I just think that anyone who is going to be dealing with this at the Omni
needs to know that not everyone is on board and that they're going to hear some
really insensitive stuff. From people you might not expect. My request to have
the Omni ban simply spraying of perfume in the space left me in tears about
ready to leave the space because of reactions like this from many members.
>
> I did have a specific issue with one member who I try not to interact with
now, who followed me out and proceeded to become aggressive and tell me I can't
survive in the real world, but that was handled for the most part. That's not
the issue, though.
>
> I don't know. My brain isn't really functioning well (brain fog yay) but I
think anyone dealing with accessibility at the Omni, especially things people
are less versed in than physical (which is bad enough to deal with) should be
well aware that while some people may be totally on board, there are some people
who are solidly against.
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Laura Turiano < scylla at riseup.net [scylla at riseup.net] > wrote:
> I would like to know who said that, Ryan, so that we can have a conversation
with them about their attitude.
>
> Laura
>
>
> On 4/19/15 8:09 PM, Ryan wrote:
>> The consistent reaction I've gotten from the community at large is "We don't
actually care about people with chemical sensitivities and would actively block
any attempts to make the space more accessible to those with respiratory
problems who are 'asking too much.'"
>>
>> So, it might be best to be honest with her, rather than pretend like the Omni
is actually going to actively work to be accessible.
>>
>> Sorry if this sounds pessimistic, but eh.
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 8:06 PM, niki < niki.shelley at gmail.com [niki.shelley at gmail.com] > wrote:
>> Hello friends,
>>
>> Someone came in today who was very concerned with our efforts to make our
space truly accessible - she was particularly concerned with building
improvements and the impact on those with chemical sensitivities. She was also
concerned with the sound system at today's event as there were some issues w/it
that made it difficult for people to hear.
>>
>> She asked us to not use any materials that will inhibit those with chemical
sensitivities from accessing the space and to create communication around our
accessibility and needs.
>>
>> She asked to see our plan for how we will do this. We don't have this scoped
out currently and I'm wondering if someone would be willing to take on the task
of researching this issue and making recommendations to the building Working
Group as well as drawing up a basic outline for providing greater accessibility.
>>
>> Can someone volunteer for this?
>>
>> xo
>>
>> N
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.omnicommons.org [discuss at lists.omnicommons.org]
>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss
[https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> building mailing list
>>
>> building at lists.omnicommons.org [building at lists.omnicommons.org]
>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/building
[https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/building]
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"BayAreaPublicSchool-organizing" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to bayareapublicschool-organizing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
[bayareapublicschool-organizing%2Bunsubscribe at googlegroups.com] .

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"BayAreaPublicSchool-organizing" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to bayareapublicschool-organizing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
[bayareapublicschool-organizing%2Bunsubscribe at googlegroups.com] .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20150421/7fa4b41a/attachment.html>