[sudo-discuss] new proposal - need input

[Marc Juul]

GCEA and Almaz are not entirely separate entities. Almaz is the
primary organizer and delegate for GCEA. Any Omni-related problems
with her are to a large extent problems with GCEA. We're talking about
permanently granting a portion of Omni's space with no required rent
to a collective whose primary organizer has been highly problematic.
In short I don't trust them (specifically Almaz) to stick to the
agreement and only expect this new agreement to generate more conflict
over the work they're supposed to do.

I'd probably be ok with this If the proposal included Almaz stepping
down and the proposal specified a set period where-after this
agreement expires and requires a new consensus to extend or make
permanent.

Also, Omni definitely needs more money. We're not saving nearly enough
for building upkeep. The roof is in terrible condition and the water
leakage is only going to make the eventual renovation more costly.
We're also relying on a lot of volunteer labor from a small group of
people to keep the currently level of income flowing and ideally we'd
be able to pay at least something for these efforts.

On 1/20/19, Yardena Cohen <yardenack at gmail.com> wrote:
> I get it. You don't like her, you don't trust her. But what does that have
> to do with THIS proposal? What specific harm is avoided by holding them to
> a pointless debt of money we don't need, which they can't pay? How is your
> problem with Almaz solved by keeping a door unlocked when its primary
> stewards want to lock it?
>
> Again, if you want GCEA to have a different delegate, why not make a
> separate proposal rather than block this one?
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2019, 3:59 AM Marc Juul <marc at juul.io wrote:
>
>> Agreed. The problem is that Almaz has not acted in good faith on
>> multiple occasions. If Almaz was to step down as GCEA organizer and
>> delegate and someone else from GCEA was to take over then it would
>> probably be possible to get consensus on this.
>>
>> On 1/19/19, hol at gaskill.com <hol at gaskill.com> wrote:
>> > Asking for near-free rent after violating terms of space use does not
>> > seem to square with the way Almaz consistently condescends to the omni
>> > community; there seems to be a pattern of trying to bend the rules and
>> > obfuscate when she gets called out.  I don't attend the Omni meetings
>> > so
>> > maybe it's different live but my $.02 would be for sudo room to block
>> > this proposal and maintain focus on the fact that this collective has
>> > not held up its side of the financial or mutual respect dimensions
>> > agreed to as condition of membership iirc, and propose a change in
>> > membership status for GCEA if needed.
>> >
>> > On 2019-01-18 1:25 pm, Yardena Cohen wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:36 PM Jenny Ryan <tunabananas at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> This is an extremely problematic issue on multiple fronts which I
>> >>> would like to discuss with Sudoers next Wednesday. Attached is sheer
>> >>> documentation, for y'allz edification.
>> >>
>> >> This doesn't add any new information IMO. They've acknowledged their
>> >> outstanding debt and they're asking for forgiveness and a change in
>> >> terms. Personally, I think it's a reasonable ask. I'm sick of this
>> >> conflict dragging on and I think we can just let them have their room
>> >> so we can stop wasting time arguing about it.
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> >> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> >> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > sudo-discuss mailing list
>> > sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> > https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >
>>
>