[sudo-discuss] Memberships

[Xer0Dynamite]

> Consider yourself unwelcome in the sudo room space pending a formal ban.

Before you (Mark Juul, Morgan Allen, Lesley Bell) shoot yourself(ves)
in the foot, I implore you to listen with your reason, rather than
your reactivity.  For example, there are no hackerspaces that are
really thriving, do you know that?  Further, the level of analysis
needed to fix sudo-room's problems are not simple. I say this from
someone who's managed hundreds of thousands of dollars, can legally
call himself a Doctor, have the auspices of MIT, and has been watching
the movement from high above to ensure that it doesn't fail.
Sometimes trouble follows individuals not because they are guilty but
because they refuse to compromise in a system that DEMANDS it.  (In
any event, you can sniff around further at
<linkedin.com/in/majanssen>.)

Hopefully, all of you took the time to read the important info in the
message (SUBJ: "Memberships") whereby I explained the complexity of
your explorations vis á vis the group known as Anonymous.  Your
judgments are COMPLETELY inappropriate pending *actually* asking me
what my views are.  Presumably, sudo-room doesn't require men to
desire male bodies EQUALLY to a woman's or to think that someone
DRESSING UP AS A GIRL has somehow magically acquired a uterus and all
the struggles that WOMEN have in this world.  I mean really give me a
fucking break, because the word "inclusivity" can start to look
awfully like marshmallow fluff when you have a lock on your door.
(BTW, I will admit to having a preference on the M/F question).  The
same issue is present with noisebridge -- they screen people who
silently match their political ethos/pathos.  It's the kind deep and
dangerous delusion that Christians have when they believe they're
fighting for Jesus.

This isn't a criticism of them, for I understand the difficulty of
what I call REALITY (the street), but better to be trained and find
heuristics to TRANSFORM these experiences than become another
bourgeois hangout for (mostly) boys.

You don't look incompetent, you look inexperienced.  I never thought
you were noobs, it's just that it would be very difficult to duplicate
the analysis that's been done to make hackerspaces self-sustaining.
It's akin to making a national _constitution_.  You should consider
that before you go excluding potential members who have offered to
help.

And finally, consider the part of the profile in which you apparently
didn't have any problems or concerns:  "suicidal".  After the failure
of Occupy, many of us involved in trying to make a balanced world are
getting burned out.  The pressures of living are high and the hopes
are not.  Hackerspaces were supposed to act as refuge and sanctuary
for such fighters.  But it is getting sidetracked by MEN who blow
their load in each other's mouths and WANT TAX BREAKS.  You didn't get
it at all:  I was called a fag in high school, so were my friends, who
were more punk than I was.  I can make legitimate use of that word and
know far more about it than you who may just be looking to be
"politically correct".  Perhaps your interest in humanity in a joke,
but it implies that there is at least one human who is on the brink of
ending his or her life.

If the aforementioned all jumped to on Juul's train of thought without
due consideration, then my analogy was more apt than I had planned:
you are like the rats congregating on that sinking ship.

Truth and Justice.

Marxos


> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Xer0Dynamite <dreamingforward at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 8/15/16, Marc Juul <juul at labitat.dk> wrote:
>> > sudo room allows ... ONE ... member to block the membership
>> > application....  ...You cannot become a sudo room member.
>> > There is no way to appeal this decision.
>> > (emphasis mine)
>>
>> Please take a moment to review your idea of memberships.  I understand
>> your current policy as it is written.  Are you aware that such a
>> policy amounts to a tacit dictatorship?  (One person can decide the
>> fate of all future interactions.)
>>
>> Onto your other points.  You decided to explore a little more than you
>> were told in the membership application and it got you into jumping to
>> some conclusions that aren't going towards truth (as you would
>> otherwise, reasonably, expect).
>>
>> The twitter account you mention has no face as it is a shared account
>> belonging to part of an activist collective called "Anonymous".  More
>> to the point, it is a space for those with no voice, like those in
>> prison for crimes that your leaders do on an annual basis, the Native
>> Americans (who shouldn't be expected to learn how to use the internet
>> just to get justice).  You apparently didn't wish to include those
>> tweets.  The profile tag line that *I* had placed there was "So
>> transparent as to be invisible...."  (and did not reference the female
>> directly).  That is, in fact, how you found it at all.  Unfortunately,
>> that tagline is no longer there.  I'm still transparent, and you can
>> ask me anything you want, should you decide to use your freedom that
>> we've been fighting on your behalf for genuine inquiry rather than
>> forming premature conclusions that serve neither me nor the future of
>> sudoroom.  We use this collective individuality as a counterpoint to
>> the adverse collective personality that you under one now called
>> "Annuit Coeptis" which you can find on the back of the US$1,
>> left-hand-side.  That phrase is ancient Latin for "We are looking over
>> you" with the preposition "over" to imply, semantically, the notion of
>> parentship.
>>
>> To the point, if you wish to go over all the tweets on that account
>> one-by-one, we can do that, in the presence of your the sudo-room
>> polit-bureau, if you'd like.  I will admit, for example, that I had
>> indeed tweeted that women should [collectively] stop sucking the cock
>> of the anti-Christ.  You got me.
>>
>> As has been communicated on several occasions by Anonymous, anyone can
>> join this movement  The membership application for the account in
>> question is much more simple.  I just have to give you the password
>> and you are automatically in, there is no vetting process.  ...But
>> judging from your message, I assume you wouldn't be interested.   Am I
>> to understand, for example, that you have only seen the anatomy of a
>> woman through approved and vetted processes and mediums, yourself?
>> Please take a moment and reflect.
>>
>> The note on the profile that you *didn't* take into account that these
>> are missives from the "uber-mind".   Perhaps it is unfortunate that it
>> makes reference to a part of the female anatomy in a manner of which
>> you do not approve.  I, myself, did approve, otherwise I would have
>> removed it, and I further know the intentions of the person(s) who set
>> that note in the profile believes and *fights* for women to be equal.
>> How much have you yourself done that?  (I should note that I cannot be
>> certain that only the one individual set that profile, such is the
>> nature of anonymity and aggregating activism.)
>>
>> I have to believe, for your sake, that your note was not sent strictly
>> with your own personality in mind, but also a result of a collective
>> consciousness in which you do not have complete control.  Few do have
>> control.  Between your diet, the medical system, and the law, pretty
>> much everyone has been p0wned.
>>
>> Towards some other points, I should attempt to reason with you on your
>> current decision.  Sudo-room, in its present state, is financially
>> insolvent, has no business plan, has rent in the 10s of THOUSANDS of
>> dollars and is in the ghetto.  You do have need to save your ship from
>> sinking.  I am here on a raft shooting the flare that "I'm here".  If
>> you wish to continue to captain that giant ship on your own, I have to
>> allow that.  For that is my own personal policy:  to allow others to
>> fail -- if, when given the options and consequences of error, they
>> choose to act on their own.  Even then.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Mark,
>> aka Marxos, Captain Dynamite.
>>
>