m (Protected "Talk:85" ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)))
Latest revision as of 19:31, 7 March 2012
 Misunderstandings about 85
- An anonymous coward wrote:
So I'm seeing edit wars and that sucks but there's kind of no option because there's no talk page and now there is so take it here, guys.
I'm wikitransposing a bunch of stuff from the articlespace to here because it's getting out of hand and crufty. Maybe we should start a new page called Beef, and you can just talk shit about people in the space or not in the space bugging you, either signing your posts or like an anonymous little coward. But at the beginning of this page it says, "This is a place to keep track of ... people who have been asked to leave Noisebridge ..." So for now, let's just limit it to that, yeah? If someone hasn't been explicitly individually asked to leave the space, please leave them off 85. As it is it's turning into a "people part of subcultures I don't like" page. 'Cause otherwise this thing is going to get ridiculous and way out of control, with oogles and other annoying individuals. And let's face it, in a place dedicated to people with limited social skills, almost everybody's a bit fucking annoying. <3
Sorry Anonymous Coward, this is completely wrong. 85 is not a list of people who have been kicked out of the space, as implied by your bad attempt at selective quoting (...) above. It's to help solve a specific problem of the space being invaded by non-hackers. It's a tool to help us determine who the problem users of the space are and then ask them to leave. (Jesse Z.)
It wasn't an attempt at selective quoting... it was selective quoting. I'd think the ellipses made that obvious and explicit. If you'd read what was actually written, you'd see I was labouring under no misimpression that this was exclusively a list of people who have been kicked out. I merely suggested that the page needed clearer focus - or don't you feel it's become crufty? People annoyed with Rayc included him on the page. Does anyone disagree that he can be difficult to deal with sometimes? But do you think he belongs on this page? I don't. But "unexcellent" is by nature subjective. Jargon file and Mitch Altman puppet shows aside, the definition of "hacker" is a contentious one as well. So then why not include rayc? or is moving shelves now "hacking" because we like him?
So if we can't come up with clearer criteria for inclusion on the page, let's just move it to "oogles" and anybody who dresses too white trash or takes the Gaia theory too seriously can go on it. It had become a subcultural witchhunt, and, I felt, not productive. You understand that the more people who can become included on the page, the less power and significance it has.
Some people ("some people") had perhaps been swept into this understandably zealous purging of counterrevolutionary elements, and painted with a broad brush. I never heard of Jedi before this whole pack of mush-brained self-styled anarchists and spangers descended upon Noisebridge in Amber's wake. Was he part of her original crew in tow? Or does he just happen to wear a beanie and camo? Who knows? Who cares? I think it was Shannon at the last meeting who made an allusion to folks enduring religious sermons for their supper, and being just as willing to "learn[...] to speak hacker" for a meal here - well, if it looks like a hacker and it quacks like a hacker... that's still better than merely asserting that because you're "with Occupy" or a human being you have a right to be in the space. If you're tinkering with stuff and seem like you're making a genuine effort to learn and interface with the existing culture I think there are a lot of people who will go to bat for you, regardless of how you got here. If nothing else, he seems to have a knowledge of the 'Net beyond checking his e-mail or of hardware hacking beyond making bongs out of whatever happens to be lying around on the shop floor. Do we now kick people out for knowing people who we haven't kicked out but don't like? If this page is merely an "on notice" page for people to shape up their behaviour, then why the endless pro/con battles below everybody's name?
That first night I added all those names in response to Kelly's desire to document incidents, I cast a wide net. If I didn't recognize you and you even looked like you could have ever owned a Limp Bizkit or Insane Clown Posse CD, I tried to put you on the list, even/especially if I didn't get your name. There was just such an onslaught, it felt out of control and I didn't feel I had the luxury to be discriminating. It was mostly public scratch paper to figure out who's who among these new faces in the space, many of whom were blatantly abusing it. I didn't intend it to be a long-term document of people we didn't like. And that vagueness is exactly what caused the page to be immediately sabotaged by other Noisebridge regulars.
Including questionable cases muddies the waters and undermines the very purpose this page was created for - to empower people to feel like they have institutional support to ask people to leave for unexcellent behaviour.
Maybe this is just a page to compare notes on people who've acted inappropriately. But then rayc doesn't get a pass just because he doesn't dress like Shaggy from "Scooby-Doo" or talk like a stoner. And certainly people don't get to censor others' comments just because someone on this list is their friend.
Edit/P.S.: Oh, God. Now, look, they've gone and added Justin. Do you seriously doubt this is going to degenerate into anything but a drama-ass slapfight if some clearer criteria aren't established? Do you really think merely being an obnoxious fucktard is grounds to be permanantly barred from the space? You don't think anyone'll block that?
If not, then please, I reiterate, please limit 85 to people you think engage in particular bannable offences, or else grow a fucking pair and tell them to their face why they're annoying, or try to kick them out yourself and then add them.
- "Please only re-add someone if you know for a fact they've been asked to leave and have specifically refused or been escorted out." --Eric
- Sorry Eric, that is just not correct. This page is to compare notes with people who may think a person's presence in inappropriate. If a person has already been asked to leave they may be placed on the 86 page. I have not seen Amber in four days and the space has been MUCH MUCH improved as a result. I would very much like it if she never returned. (Jesse Z.)
- No, if you look at 86 you'll see that's simply not the way it's worked so far. 86 has been strictly for people who had to be forcibly ejected from Noisebridge for the immediate security of others or their property. 85 has included people who were asked to leave, whether or not they protested or wanted to state their case at a meeting. (Eric)
- 85 is a jury, not a judge. It's a place to discuss people you are concerned about but not certain enough about to unilaterally ban. You should not put anyone on 85 unless you think there's a serious possibility they should be asked to leave, and the purpose is not to slander but to facilitate community input to the decision process. If it were really the case that people should only be there after they've been asked to leave, then we'd have an 84 page for the purpose 85 currently serves. (Jesse Z)
- Then Rayc belongs there. <3 eric
- 220.127.116.11 -- Sorry if this seems like edit warring. I just didn't feel certain that by merely placing a comment here you'd see it.
I am not attached to the idea of Rayc/Justin/whoever on 85 one way or another. But now we're conflating multiple issues. Either 85 is a space for those who have acted particularly unexcellently in one or more people's eyes or it's a page for homeless people/we don't like or it's a page for people who've been asked to leave. Since James Z. asserted it was not merely for people who are potentially banned, I readded the slashfic. Since to my knowledge neither Amber, Anthony, Cynthia, Derek, James, Jedi, Nyle, nor the yogurt cup guy has been personally asked to leave and it seemed to be becoming more soapbox than resource, I proposed more stringent criteria for inclusion. But it's clear from these edits those criteria have never been explicit nor agreed upon.
If you still want to take off Robert + Justin I ask that you remove the aforementioned names as well. If James insists on their inclusion, then I think we need to come to some consensus on what, exactly, it is that this page is listing. <3 eric
- Although I think we can agree lurk moar != potentially asked to leave. er*
- OK. Fine. I tried. I really tried to assume good faith and to make this page both fair and a useful resource. We appear to be going in circles here. Are you illiterate or just fucking stupid? Probably you're just ignoring me. But it's become obvious the purpose of 85 is in fact NO PEOPLE WHO LOOK POOR ALLOWED. Whatever. If that's consensus I guess everybody's happy. (Eric)
- I don't think 85 is a place exclusively for people who have been asked to leave, but if you have asked someone to leave, you should certainly add them to 85. If they were forced to leave because of the immediate danger they posed to the space or the community, they should go on 86. I agree with the way [[user:Hurtstotouchfire|Kelly] described it (paraphrase, not quote). Flamsmark 17:26, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
We don't demand that everybody is hacking every moment that they spend at Noisebridge. It's completely legitimate to take a break from your project to have a soda, shoot the breeze, or check your email. So, if you see someone in the space who's relaxing, not hacking (or planning to hack, learning to hack &c), you don't know whether you've just wandered in as they're taking a breather. Even if that happens a few times, you don't know whether you just keep catching them at the wrong moments. Even if a dozen people only ever see them "between hacking" no one of them can be sure that they aren't just catching this person at the wrong moments. However, if we record these things we can know that a particular person has only been seen "between hacking" by twenty people over the last month. At that point if you see them in the space "between hacking" you have a much more compelling basis on which to ask them to leave because they are not hacking at the space.
"For we're excellent to each other here
We rarely ever block
We value tools over pre-emptive rules
And spurn the key and the lock.
— Danny O'Brien, 2010-11-09 general meeting notes"
 Old beef
- Robert is at Noisebridge a lot. He enjoys giving tours of the place. Occasionally he rubs people the wrong way. ( FIGURATIVELY ).
- Justin emails the mailing list a lot about his feelings. I humbly suggest he start a blog, then email everyone a pointer to it.
Some people seem to have gotten the impression Noisebridge is a 24-hour hangout and drop-in center, whether or not sleep is permitted. With refrigerators where you can leave your food.
The following people have been accused of using Noisebridge as a crashpad and the general sentiment seems to be that they are not making the space more Excellent.
- guy with cane who isn't Zack
- Has not slept or stored stuff at the space in any way.
- Assisted with Removing Jonathon from the space
- Has been active in utilizing the space productively.
- Iraq War Veteran with two purple hearts. (edited by Jedi)
 Yogurt Container Man
- I forget his name. Nice guy, unshaven, pretending extremely hard to not be homeless, plays chess, is really handy at repairing the Occupiers clothes with a needle and thread or with the sewing machines. Stores random things in the shelves in the middle of the space.