No one has any input on my suggestions? Regards, Andrew L On Apr 16, 2014 6:52 PM, "a l" <leit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This seems like two unrelated proposals: Family dues discounts and Key > access to minors. Perhaps I just misinterpreted formatting. > > > I couldn't organize my words to reflect my thoughts at the time, but the > idea of 'grandfathering' in a key that hasn't even been approved yet rubs > me the wrong way. I agree that changing the rules after the fact is > unexcellent and as they are written now there are no restrictions on keys > beyond being a member of good standing who has demonstrated > trustworthiness. The discussion surrounding key holders was brought up due > to concerns(that have largely been satisfied). This isn't about > grandfathering. We are making an exception. > Related to approving keys for one minor before instituting an age > requirement with no cause. This suggest one of two scenarios: 1) we don't > trust minors and their guardians to act responsibly but no one wants to be > the one to say no. 2)Somehow we trust this minor and guardians and believe > that no one else could ever be as responsible as they are. That members who > helped start SynHak and their children(should their child want to pursue > membership and keys) could never be as responsible. > Either every minor can be trusted with a key or none can and we have to > force the guardians to go through the appropriate processes. We trust > minors enough to give them full membership status empowering them to vote > on how to spend money and who the board and officers are. They are > even(currently) eligible to run for these positions themselves. So long as > they have proven they can fulfill the requirements as outlined in the > current rules why should they not be granted a key? > > > I'm not against responsible people having keys. I just want uniform > rules. To that end I have some suggestions for this discussion. > All minors may be assigned keys > Legal guardians must be in the same room as them while operating > power tools, heated tools, or other hazardous tools. > 0 Tolerance for both the minor and the guardian in following > this rule. > Consult with insurance: Minors over the age of 14/16 only require a > relative over 25/30? > > While I am entirely against the prospect of allowing one minor to have a > key and bar others just because their proposal came up first in the > minutes. I want to make rules that are logical. We aren't creating rules > for just one person. Many of us have expressed interest in outreach to > young hackers and I don't want a feeling of second class membership to > stand in the way of their hacking. > > regards, > Andrew L > > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Torrie Fischer > <tdfisc...@hackerbots.net>wrote: > >> As promised, here's the full proposal we decided on last night: >> >> ----8<---- >> Membership dues will have the following discount structure: >> >> * Regular rate for the first adult 18 earth years of age and older >> * A minimum of $15/mo for each additional adult 18 earth years of age and >> older >> * A minimum of $5/mo for each additional child younger than 18 earth >> years of >> age >> >> The space rules are amended to include: >> >> * Minors under 18 earth years of age are not permitted to visit SYNHAK >> without >> the supervision of an adult and the permission of their parent/guardian. >> >> Key policy is updated to read: >> >> * Keys are restricted to those with membership before May 1st, 2014, and >> afterwards only adults who are 18 earth years of age and older >> ---->8---- >> >> Let me know if this is wrong at all. >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> Discuss@synhak.org >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
