Rob, Yes, I plan to come to SH tomorrow morning.
What time do you want me to be there to open the building? Anytime after 9am is fine with me. I will be working on the display wall tomorrow - temporarily removing everything, patching the wall, painting the wall, and making a new wood wall cleat of my own design to suspend the photo frames by wire or nylon line. Philip On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Robert Rybicki <rob...@robertrybicki.com>wrote: > Philip > > Robert W and I are committed to cleaning up tomorrow for the scheduled > clean up day. Do you plan on attending again? We got a lot done last > month. > > Does anyone else have any idea the earliest we can get started? Robert W > might receive his key tomorrow if it works out we can close the space if > needed, but we still need someone to get us started. > > Thanks > Rob > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Apr 26, 2014, at 8:05 AM, "Philip P. Patnode" <ppatn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Looking forward to seeing Robert (Rob and Jenny too) at the space sometime > soon. > > If Robert wants to be involved in a group project at SH, like cleaning or > painting or sorting, just ask and someone will include him. > > Philip > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Robert Rybicki <rob...@robertrybicki.com > > wrote: > >> Jen walked away from last weeks meeting under the impression that this >> had not been settled. It was only agreed that Robert Walter would get a >> key. We greatly appreciate everyone's faith in Robert W and his support >> network. >> >> I don't believe it is too crazy to think that other children or >> adolescents and their families are also mature and trustworthy. I don't >> feel comfortable about us being a special case. I like the way Philip >> worded it because it entrusts the legal guardian in the case of a minor and >> yet does not bar minors from 24/7 access. >> >> Best >> Rob >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Apr 25, 2014, at 9:50 PM, a l <leit...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The minutes do reflect people agreeing that it was submitted as one >> proposal that is not what I am confused about. >> My questions are: >> 1) Should it be one proposal. I view this as two different issues. Dues >> are a recommendation to the Board, Keys are a modification of our operating >> procedure decided by the membership. >> 2) Was this proposal passed? I have serious moral reservations on its >> wording which I expressed above and made suggestions to make the proposal >> acceptable. Until this weeks minutes there was no indication that anyone >> had read Torrie's email, or mine sent shortly after. >> >> regards, >> Andrew L >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Philip P. Patnode <ppatn...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Becca, >>> >>> Thank you! >>> >>> I will ponder the details and ramifications of the proposed proposal and >>> submit it in writing within 24 hours. >>> >>> Of course, I will add at least three good reasons for the membership to >>> consider as they discuss and vote/consense on the issue. >>> >>> I hope this proposal can be brought up for discussion at the meeting on >>> Tuesday, April 29th, considering it has been under informal discussion for >>> about six months. >>> >>> Have good weekend. >>> >>> Philip >>> >>> Philip >>> >>> Philip >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:08 PM, Becca Salchak <blsalc...@yahoo.com>wrote: >>> >>>> Yes Philip I will third it >>>> On Apr 25, 2014 9:08 PM, "Philip P. Patnode" <ppatn...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Becca, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the reply and clarification of the details surrounding >>>>> membership, dues, and key access. >>>>> >>>>> About the geezer discount - >>>>> >>>>> I will submit a formal proposal to "propos...@synhak.org" (and a copy >>>>> to this list too) this weekend to reduce the membership fee for active and >>>>> prospective members who are age 62 or more to $25 per month. >>>>> >>>>> Devin Wolfe has agreed to second the proposal. >>>>> >>>>> Can you offer a 3rd motion to accept the proposal or should I ask >>>>> someone else? >>>>> >>>>> Philip >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 8:28 PM, a l <leit...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> There is a reply from Becca that displays on my phone but not my >>>>>> laptop so I hope this message get put in the proper context. >>>>>> >>>>>> Becca, >>>>>> The minutes do not reflect any consent on family dues nor restricting >>>>>> keys to minors. They do reflect consent on issuing Robert a key. >>>>>> I asked for clarification on the discussion that was conducted >>>>>> surrounding this proposal and the response was: >>>>>> The wording had not been changed, no one saw this as two separate >>>>>> issues, and that it was still an open proposal. >>>>>> >>>>>> If anyone else remembers differently than the minutes reflect please >>>>>> speak up. We need to have accurate minutes especially since we operate >>>>>> on a >>>>>> "mailing list or it didn't happen" basis. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> regards, >>>>>> Andrew L >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Philip P. Patnode < >>>>>> ppatn...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> TWIMC at SH, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since I have been isolated on my private island for the past week or >>>>>>> so, I may have missed some details. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If anybody is interested, here is my position and thoughts on >>>>>>> several of the points under discussion about membership, dues, and key >>>>>>> access. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> dues >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * regular rate of $35 per month for anybody over age 18 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * discount rate for families - $35 per month for first adult, plus >>>>>>> $15 per month for each additional person over age 18, plus $5 per month >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> kids under age 18 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * discount rate for high school and college students - $15 per month >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * discount of 10% off the monthly amount for pre-payment of 3 or >>>>>>> more months for any membership, paid in advance >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What happened to the long-discussed "senior discount"? I brought up >>>>>>> the issue way back in Oct or Nov at one of the first weekly meetings I >>>>>>> ever >>>>>>> attended, but no definitive action has ever been taken. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *I suggest that a senior discount be established at the rate of $25 >>>>>>> per month. * >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *membership* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * should be open to all, with exceptions, subject to approval by the >>>>>>> existing membership >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * should be denied to illegal immigrants, convicted felons, known >>>>>>> drug users, and anybody on the Ohio/any other state sex offenders list >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * should be suspended for members who have not paid their dues after >>>>>>> 30days and rescinded permanently if the dues are not paid after 90days. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *key access* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * should be available to all active members (over age 18) in good >>>>>>> standing, on written request and after a discussion of the request at a >>>>>>> weekly meeting, with an open vote or consensus by members present >>>>>>> (unanimous vote required) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * should be available to one or both of the parents/guardians of an >>>>>>> active member under age 18 in good standing - the member can have the >>>>>>> key, >>>>>>> but can only use it when accompanied by their parent or guardian >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * should be immediately rescinded and the key recovered from any >>>>>>> member who fails to lock the building (front door and/or garage door) on >>>>>>> exit, if they are the person responsible for closing the space >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * should be immediately rescinded and the key recovered from any >>>>>>> member who shares the key with anybody else not authorized to have key >>>>>>> access >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am in full agreement with the comment by Andrew about minors and >>>>>>> their parents/guardians while at the building. A minor should never, >>>>>>> ever >>>>>>> be left alone in any area of the space (except the bathroom), but must >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> under constant supervision by the parent or guardian or a member (as >>>>>>> chosen >>>>>>> or approved by the parent or guardian). Members present should not be >>>>>>> expected or encouraged to "babysit" the younger members while the >>>>>>> parent is >>>>>>> outside smoking/chatting/stargazing or engaged in their own project, >>>>>>> ignoring the kid. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For example, if Robert (age 7) would like to have a 2x4 sawed in >>>>>>> half on the chop saw, I would be happy to do it for him, subject to >>>>>>> approval by Rob or Jenny. If Robert wants to help paint a wall, I >>>>>>> would >>>>>>> be happy to have him on the painting team while Rob or Jenny is off >>>>>>> doing >>>>>>> something else. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Feel free to reply or comment in person. I am always open to >>>>>>> suggestions and constructive criticism. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Philip >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:39 PM, a l <leit...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Discuss mailing list >>>>>>> Discuss@synhak.org >>>>>>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Discuss mailing list >>>>>> Discuss@synhak.org >>>>>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Discuss mailing list >>>>> Discuss@synhak.org >>>>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Discuss mailing list >>>> Discuss@synhak.org >>>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> Discuss@synhak.org >>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> Discuss@synhak.org >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> Discuss@synhak.org >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@synhak.org > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@synhak.org > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
