On Thursday, May 01, 2014 11:57:16 Steve Radonich IV wrote: > Of course you ignore all points I have made in the email. I have no idea > what your motivations are, but you obviously started this. I love how even > you can't defend what you've said.
If you have no idea what my motivations are, then why are we fighting? You're
just arguing with me for the sake of arguing unless you are trying to change
my mind about something.
I like to think that I know what your motivations are. I know that you want
the best for SYNHAK. The two of us obviously have a very different opinion
about how to accomplish it.
However, mine was solidified three years ago when all this started. One simply
cannot come into a community of any size and decide to completely change how
it all works. This is why there is resistance from the folks who have been
around SYNHAK and myself for a very long time. They understand the goal of the
space and the purposes of why I do what I do.
This is my analysis of what has happened:
We wanted a hacker space in Akron. A safe space where we can come in, and
hack. Nobody wanted to vote on things every week. We never used Robert's Rules
of Order. Professionalism was scoffed at and rules were bent because that is
what hackers do. We void warranties, do strange things with electricity, cook
amazing food, and build fire pits from washing machine drums.
I think the biggest hack we've accomplished so far as a group is convincing
the Federal Government of the United States that this idea doesn't need to pay
taxes. I know that this is something you can resonate with. The second biggest
would be the fact that the Knight Foundation gave this idea a check for
$15,000, no questions asked.
SYNHAK was envisioned as a hub of creative expressions within art and science
based on do-ocracy, consensus, and excellence a la Noisebridge's design. A big
inspiration was this often repeated quote from Noisebridge's Vision page:
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
I am a very principled person who sticks to her guns. Those racks that were
brought in did not have the consent of all the members. Even fewer people
consented once the sublease was published. The argument was that they were do-
ocractically done.
Thats not how it works though. All three values should be held at the same
time. They're not exclusive, rather three facets of the same idea.
Consensus, one of our core values, was thrown aside and many of us found that
unacceptable. We all saw how that went down. It boggles my mind that some
would still try to defend it because "Someone was trying to help the space". I
could also "help" the space by calling in a city inspector to make sure our
permits...oh, well then. "Helping" is a very relative term depending on if
you're short-sighted or looking at the big picture.
In concert, tensions were growing with the move-in and buildout period.
Everyone wanted to get back to hacking as fast as possible, but some of us had
different opinions about how fast we should move and who should take on what
responsibility. As a result, everyone was afraid of stepping on toes. We were
all walking on eggshells.
I briefly asked someone a question about the overhead lighting, and was told
that "They did it all wrong and one of these days I'm going to just rip it out
and rewire it." That is not an exact quote, but you get the idea. Those sorts
of people refused to participate in discussions about what they were doing and
how everyone else could help out. Since most everyone was busy with their own
things, I thought I could play project manager for a short period and try to
get everyone in sync. The whiteboard in the front entrance was updated daily
with who is working on what, and I'd ask everyone their guess on what they
would do next.
Didn't help though. People stopped giving input and caring about what others
thing. Excellence was just an afterthought. We're all guilty of that from time
to time, but never before all of us at once. Everything was done in the name
of do-ocracy because thats all that was left.
Those tensions turned into bitterness towards others in the space. Some of it
amplified issues started back at 21 W. North nearly a year ago that remained
unresolved, despite the best efforts of everyone to mediate the dispute. It
culminated in a meeting a few weeks ago where I was told that the source of
the issue was marijuana. Only later did I find out that there was a fourteen
point list of items covering everything about me, which personally I think
could be summed up in this image:
http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1324596542030_7713053.png
Some of it was directed at my gender identity, which is a core facet of every
human.
Additionally, I've pointed out in your email what was offensive. Your rebuttal
was essentially a rephrasing of "but its not offensive!". Tough shit. I was
offended. I still am. Could I spout slurs and derogatory phrases at any other
member and explain how what they're feeling is wrong because I say so? You
can't apply logic to emotions. They're separate and distinct from one another.
When someone openly says how much they don't like me because of things that
are impossible to change, I no longer feel safe in such an environment. Hiatus
happened in the hopes that I could have a few months off and let the community
deal with life and build a solution to the problem.
Nope. A meeting to vote me out of my position was called up. As others have
already said, this is a knee jerk reaction to a situation that has been going
on for months. If the complaint is that it takes too long for all of us to be
happy with a situation, that isn't a valid complaint. In the end, we're *all*
happy, right?
I didn't want to come back and write that mail. I really wish I was still off
in my own world, living a stress free life where I don't feel like the last
three years have been a waste. More so, I wish I didn't have to take a hiatus
in the first place!
My motivations are exactly the same as yours, Steve. I want SYNHAK to be a
kick-ass hacker space that makes positive change. However, the core values
that have been in place since 2011 do not change without resistance from those
who hold on to them. I would suggest trying to understand what those values
really mean to you, and to everyone else involved with SYNHAK.
>
> -Steve
>
> Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 11:31:51 -0400
> From: mgriesac...@gmail.com
> To: discuss@synhak.org
> Subject: Re: [SH-Discuss] Proposal: Removal of Torrie from the
> SYNHAK Community
>
> I don't know how Steve or any of us can guess your motivation at times, not
> sure that is even a fair question, or relevant. Perhaps you would enlighten
> us on your motivation, but some of your behavior doesn't seem justifiable
> to me in any context. In this respect I will not block this proposal,
> however I would like to see how the rest of the members choose to deal with
> this, and feel that protecting/enabling abusive behavior is not really a
> solution that any of us should be comfortable with. I can't say I know how
> all of this started, as it seems that some actions are actually reactions
> to prior events, but we have to start making it better. I want a community
> that I can be proud of.
>
>
> regards,
>
>
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 7:32 AM, Torrie Fischer <tdfisc...@hackerbots.net>
> wrote:
>
> Steve, if I started things as you suggest, whats my motivation?
>
> On Thursday, May 01, 2014 04:37:33 Steve Radonich IV wrote:
> > I understand that there is going to be a lot of resistance to such a
> >
> > proposal, and in fact believe that the most likely outcome is having the
> >
> > proposal rejected by the membership. However, I do hope that we can have a
> >
> > productive conversation addressing an issue that we are having that is
> >
> > typically left to be discussed about little groups. I do feel that Torrie
> >
> > has been acting in a manner that is very detrimental to the community and
> >
> > has caused SYNHAK to start to tear itself apart.
> >
> >
> >
> > I personally don't like my name being publicly tarnished by someone who's
> >
> > accusations about me are unfounded. I have admitted that my wording was
> > not
> >
> > acceptable and , if I haven't already I certainly meant to, apologise to
> >
> > Torrie for saying those unexcellent things. What I said though does not
> >
> > deserve me being continually called a transphobe on the public discuss
> >
> > list, especially after I have addressed this before I believe multiple
> >
> > times. How anyone can defend her comments on the discuss list the last 24
> >
> > hours really baffles my mind.
> >
> >
> >
> > Not only have I tried to discuss some of these issues on the mailing list,
> > I
> >
> > have not once responded to anything Torrie has said in a nasty manner.
> >
> > While in comparison Torrie goes into other threads in the public mail list
> >
> > and trashes me there as well. On top of that after no one else on the
> >
> > discuss list comes to my defence when I have been the civil one in this
> >
> > whole affair, instead I get champions and others going to the defence of
> >
> > Torrie. Then when I make a proposal to have her removed from the
> > community,
> >
> > because not many on the list were completely fine with her comments and
> > sat
> >
> > idle, multiple people express their intentions to block it, some without
> >
> > any reasons as to why they're going to block it. People may not want to
> >
> > admit it, but there are those in the group that will not criticise Torrie
> >
> > no matter what she says or does, I guess because either they are very good
> >
> > friends with her, or because she came up with the idea of SYNHAK.
> >
> >
> >
> > I honestly had a lot of respect for her in the past, as well as enjoyed
> >
> > hanging out with her at and outside of SYNHAK. Up until the last 24 hours
> > I
> >
> > had hope that me and her could still remain friends, however she burned
> >
> > that bridge as she intended to with her initial email under the "Hiatus
> >
> > Hiatus" thread.
> >
> > Quote from her initial email:
> > "I'm also aware of a board vote to remove me from my office of
> >
> > Treasurer, so I figure that I might as well join the fun and burn some
> >
> > bridges while I go down in beautiful crimson flames."
> >
> >
> >
> > Can someone please explain to me why I am the unreasonable one because I
> >
> > feel that someone who acts like that has no place in a community that is
> >
> > supposed to be open to everyone? Is it because I feel that she has become
> >
> > the center of such a big issue involving many members of SYNHAK? Ask
> >
> > yourself the following: Has her response to many of the emails today been
> >
> > in line with our Code of Conduct "Be excellent to each other"?
> >
> >
> >
> > I really want to have a discussion on this issue, and I thought the
> > discuss
> >
> > list was a place where we all are supposed to discuss things, so as not to
> >
> > exclude anyone who can not make it to a Tuesday meeting. Instead when I
> > put
> >
> > time into a reply that really wants to get deep into the issue and truly
> >
> > solve it most of my points or questions go unaddressed in responses.
> >
> >
> >
> > To sum this all up as simply as I can: The biggest problem I see is that
> >
> > Torrie preaches how we should all be open minded to other view points and
> >
> > ideas, at least giving them some serious thought, and I can totally agree
> >
> > with that. However, open mindedness is not a one-way street but she seems
> >
> > to think that it works that way. As soon as I expressed a view point that
> >
> > was polar opposite of one of hers she started being aggressive towards me
> >
> > and I find that unfortunate. This all could have been avoided if she
> >
> > practiced what she preached.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hope to get some serious replies instead of the normal name calling and
> >
> > complete dismissal.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > From: tdfisc...@hackerbots.net
> >
> > To: discuss@synhak.org
> >
> > Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 02:13:00 -0400
> >
> > Subject: Re: [SH-Discuss] Proposal: Removal of Torrie from the
> >
> > SYNHAK Community
> >
> > On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 20:34:50 a l wrote:
> > > If anything we owe it to -any- of our members to set up the CWG and
> > >
> > > determine a course of action surrounding their continued involvement.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I have a draft of the proposal for a CWG but I have been focusing on
> > >
> > > school
> > >
> > > lately. I will send it out tonight. Omar had also indicated that he has
> > >
> > > suggestions for the CWG.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I did not mean to imply malicious editing. There was a time when we all
> > >
> > > got
> > >
> > > along , even had fun together, and I'm just naive enough to think
> > > there's
> > >
> > > a
> > >
> > > chance we can still return to that.
> >
> > Andrew, I've never stopped believing in that.
> >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Andrew L
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Apr 30, 2014 8:21 PM, "Robert Rybicki" <rob...@robertrybicki.com>
>
> wrote:
> > > > Torrie is one of Robert W favorite people in the world. Jen or myself
> > > >
> > > > will
> > > >
> > > > be blocking this by proxy.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Torrie is beyond talented in so many ways and is a huge benefit to the
> > > >
> > > > community. Granted she is currently using her talents to insult and
> > > >
> > > > flame
> > > >
> > > > others on the mailing list, her unexcellent behavior is a response to
> > > >
> > > > insults and threatening behavior. You people need to work it out
> > > > because
> > > >
> > > > forcing each other out of the community or out of offices is not
> > > > cutting
> > > >
> > > > it. That goes for Torrie as well.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Apr 30, 2014, at 7:54 PM, Chris Egeland <ch...@chrisegeland.com>
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Chiming in that I will block this proposal. That is all.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Chris Egeland
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Apr 30, 2014, at 19:50, Steve Radonich IV <nesfr...@outlook.com>
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm sorry but we do not have time to set up a CWG with all of the
> > > >
> > > > procedures and such they are supposed to follow while this type of
> > > >
> > > > treatment is going on. These are all publicly available on the email
> > > >
> > > > list
> > > >
> > > > and the quotes are in no way altered. I really am failing to see your
> > > >
> > > > logic
> > > >
> > > > in defending Torrie's actions today on the discuss list when she has
> > > >
> > > > been
> > > >
> > > > nothing but vile towards others.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -Steve
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 19:45:41 -0400
> > > >
> > > > From: leit...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > To: discuss@synhak.org
> > > >
> > > > Subject: Re: [SH-Discuss] Proposal: Removal of Torrie from the SYNHAK
> > > >
> > > > Community
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure we have enough facts to back up the claims made in some
> > > > of
> > > >
> > > > these quotes.
> > > >
> > > > Until such time that we get the community working group involved and
> > > >
> > > > have
> > > >
> > > > all the facts rather than partial quotes and hurt feelings I cannot
> > > >
> > > > support
> > > >
> > > > this proposal.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Andrew L
> > > >
> > > > On Apr 30, 2014 7:26 PM, "Steve Radonich IV" <nesfr...@outlook.com>
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Proposal: Removal Torrie from the SYNHAK Community
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I am proposing the following:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The removal of Torrie Fischer from the SYNHAK community for the
> > > >
> > > > following
> > > >
> > > > reasons.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > * Negatively talking about SYNHAK affecting the public opinion of the
> > > >
> > > > community on the mailing lists, examples being:
> > > > * "Never started SYNHAK, the Akron Hackerspace." - Wed, April 30
> > > >
> > > > 2014
> > > >
> > > > 17:09
> > > >
> > > > * "Then I hear that I'm being removed as Treasurer due to Devin
> > > > and
> > > >
> > > > Andy's persecution complex, so I started looking for housing in the
> > > >
> > > > San Francisco because SYNHAK is dead to me." - Wed, April 30 2014
> > > >
> > > > 15:59
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > * "It died months ago when I was convinced to rescind my proposal
> > > > to
> > > >
> > > > remove Justin from the board." - Wed, April 30 2014 15:59
> > > >
> > > > * "Congrats! I'm so proud of everyone. We are now (in)famous
> > > > within
> > > >
> > > > the hacker communities." - Wed, April 30 2014 12:49
> > > >
> > > > * "RIP SYNHAK. Killed by bystander apathy." - Wed, April 30 2014
> > > >
> > > > 14:29
> > > >
> > > > * Publicly attacking Steve Radonich IV and Andy B. on the mailing list
> > > >
> > > > by
> > > >
> > > > unjustly calling them names, examples being:
> > > > * "Remember, folks: you voted this mental midget of a person onto
> > > >
> > > > the
> > > >
> > > > board :)" - Wed, April 30 2014 12:49 - Directed towards Andy
> > > >
> > > > * "Remember, folks: I'm someone who should be put up with! You all
> > > >
> > > > decided to go along with his plan to introduce more rules and
> > > >
> > > > bureaucracy
> > > >
> > > > to stop someone from forcing the community to address a situation
> > > >
> > > > where
> > > >
> > > > they feel completely unsafe!" - Wed, April 30 2014 12:49 - Directed
> > > >
> > > > towards
> > > >
> > > > Steve
> > > >
> > > > * "A community that doesn't treat me like some strange sexual
> > > >
> > > > fascination as if my genitals define who I am." - Wed, April 30 2014
> > > >
> > > > 17:09
> > > >
> > > > - Directed towards Steve
> > > >
> > > > * "Steve loves rules and has an authoritarian stance on
> > > > everything.
> > > >
> > > > Thats the only reasonable answer that can explain this majestic piece
> > > > of
> > > >
> > > > legalese:" - Wed, April 30 2014 16:12 - Directed towards Steve
> > > >
> > > > * Using her position of Treasurer to target those she has a
> > > >
> > > > disagreement with:
> > > > * "Devin - It will be reimbursed just not now, but me and Andy
> > > > have
> > > >
> > > > been told no on reimbursements and just only us. Given reciepts to
> > > >
> > > > others
> > > >
> > > > to get the money. Someone took something the wrong way, and they are
> > > >
> > > > attacking back using the position as treasurer. But this needs to stop
> > > >
> > > > right now, because it is discriminatory." - Tue, April 29 2014 -
> > > > Meeting
> > > >
> > > > Minutes
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It is with these issues, and others that I may not even be aware of,
> > > >
> > > > that
> > > >
> > > > I feel Torrie Fischer is no longer someone SYNHAK can afford to have
> > > >
> > > > around. Causing division and strife within the community, then
> > > > refusing
> > > >
> > > > to
> > > >
> > > > take responsibility for it. She has shown that she can't be trusted in
> > > > a
> > > >
> > > > position of power within SYNHAK as she uses it as a weapon on her
> > > >
> > > > personal
> > > >
> > > > enemies. Personally attacking members, calling them transphobes when
> > > >
> > > > there
> > > >
> > > > is no evidence of such, talking negatively about SYNHAK, and saying
> > > > that
> > > >
> > > > SYNHAK is dead are all reasons for removal. Plus if she thinks it's
> > > > dead
> > > >
> > > > then there is no reason for her to be here any ways as it will just
> > > >
> > > > cause
> > > >
> > > > trouble.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -Steve
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > >
> > > > 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
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
