Re: [SH-Discuss] Hacking the Tuesday Meeting
On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 00:07:46 Andrew Buczko wrote: There was no further discussion needed, we had already reached consensus at the previous meeting. Nothing had changed from the previous meeting. As far as name calling, stating what she did and how she acted is not name calling. My original proposal was that they would have two weeks to move out, or a champion would start eviction proceedings: Something New Entertainment, LLC is given a 14 day notice to vacate the premises. The racks shall be dismantled and removed after the 14 day notice. If there is opposition from Something New Entertainment, LLC, eviction procedures as prescribed by the State of Ohio will be enacted by the Champions. -- https://synhak.org/wiki/Meetings/2014-3-18 What we ended up consensing on was that I would help them find a new space, even if it took all six months: * Everyone will make their best effort to assist Something New LLC to vacate the sub-lease with SynHak early. * No Legal repercussions. * Both Parties will agree -- https://synhak.org/wiki/Meetings/2014-3-18 For reasons beyond my understanding or concern, they're gone now, so the whole problem is now solved. If you or your proxy wish to bring all this up again at the meeting tonight, thats fine, consensus will still eventually happen on what to do about it. Otherwise, lets move on. On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Omar Rassi omar.ra...@gmail.com wrote: Nothing going on at Synhak is more important than your regular job or your family. IMHO On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:26 PM, Omar Rassi omar.ra...@gmail.com wrote: Andy I was also at the meeting, you also yelled out during the meeting, as did Justin and Torrie. Let's refrain from pointing fingers and calling people names, no one can claim to be perfect so please do not point to others as if you are guiltless, it is rather immature. Discussion on the proposal needed to happen, it happened, as a result the proposal changed into something those present could agree on. That is what consensus is supposed to do. It is done now, please do not bring it up again. If at any point you or anyone else feels your time is being wasted, you can name a proxy and leave. Nothing going on at Synhak is more important than your regular job or your family. On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 7:51 PM, a l leit...@gmail.com wrote: If you've got an issue with someone could you bring it up in a mature way please. A) Calling people names doesn't get your message across very well B) This is public C) We're trying to move on. On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Andrew Buczko a4s...@dsprototyping.com wrote: The only one screaming and yelling was you Torrie, everyone else was getting along just fine. Instead of trying something new, why don't we follow the rules that we already have in place. For instance, at last weeks meeting we where supposed to vote on your proposal to remove the lease racks, but instead you started wining and crying that we have to reach consensus (this was done at the last meeting, after they had your proposals changed and after the parties in question opted for a vote instead of a KDE group discussion) . Instead You (Torrie) wasted everyone's day. On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Torrie Fischer tdfisc...@hackerbots.net wrote: On Monday, March 24, 2014 12:16:32 Craig Bergdorf wrote: --I don't think there is a single person here who can honestly say that the membership is currently a wonderful and tight-knight community of people who trusts that we are all looking out for the group's best interests. (Raises hand) - I do I think that you're in the minority, unfortunately. Either that or blindly assuming that everyone is exceedingly happy to talk with everyone else. Would there have been screaming and yelling at last week's meeting if we all got along? Probably not, but that right there indicates at least two people at odds with each other. Maybe not so tight-knit anymore, but still within spec, and most certainly looking out for the space's best interests. I emphatically trust the members of synhak by default, and the majority of people who have walked through the front door have not given me a reason to doubt them. On Mar 24, 2014 11:04 AM, Torrie Fischer tdfisc...@hackerbots.net wrote: On Monday, March 24, 2014 09:06:20 a l wrote: Top-down is not how SYNHAK started, nor is it how we've ever ran things. I don't recall saying that it was. My point was that we are an organization that has meetings. People have brought up that meetings take too long and go too in-depth on topics not everyone cares about. Many people brought up how other organizations conduct their meetings. I just wanted to make sure we weren't
Re: [SH-Discuss] Hacking the Tuesday Meeting
On Monday, March 24, 2014 13:42:48 Torrie Fischer wrote: Here's a wiki page I wrote with a more fleshed out version of what I want to try, why I want to try it, and why it is beneficial to SYNHAK as a whole: https://synhak.org/wiki/Consensus_process Here also is a writeup by a recent noisebridger about how consensus works there: https://noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2014-March/043117.html Their current implementation uses Github as the channel for discussion, where proposals come up and others may make merge requests with their modifications. On Monday, March 24, 2014 11:04:01 Torrie Fischer wrote: On Monday, March 24, 2014 09:06:20 a l wrote: Top-down is not how SYNHAK started, nor is it how we've ever ran things. I don't recall saying that it was. My point was that we are an organization that has meetings. People have brought up that meetings take too long and go too in-depth on topics not everyone cares about. Many people brought up how other organizations conduct their meetings. I just wanted to make sure we weren't being myopic in looking for ways to streamline our meetings. Sure Robert's rules flow using parliamentary/traditional/top-down infrastructure but at the end of the day you have a source of power deciding that a topic has had enough time, using a set of rules to move the discussion on to something else. In my mind some of these rules may be adopted substituting the members present/consensus for a central command structure/voting. The moderator's role is to: - Make sure everyone gets a chance to speak - Speak minimally yourself - Keep the meeting moving - Handle the membership voting process - Be sure to thoroughly follow the procedure outlined in this document, as the template may occasionally change without warning. - The order of things is also important. We induct new members prior to proposals, so that they too may have a say in things. https://synhak.org/wiki/Next_Meeting#Moderator In the past when announcements have turned into discussion they have reminded us 'Hey, this goes here' or when it seems most people are done discussing things they as is it cool we we end the meeting and you keep discussing after?. I'm not saying we give the moderator any more power than they already [don't] have. I'm saying if people are unhappy with how meetings are going lets change the rules we use. Who cares whether the rules come from Robert or MIBS so long as they work for our community? Right. I would like to be moderator this week to try out this pattern: * Get rid of the tables and arrange the chairs in a circle, so nobody is standing up and there isn't anything in between any of us * Introductions, but instead of What do you do?, a different prompt that helps everyone get to know each other. What would your superhero power be? * Announcements! Everyone gets exactly two uninterrupted minutes to make an announcement. Everyone gets a turn before anyone goes twice. * Membership, though we don't have any interviews this week. * Financial report. Just the same brief statements I've been doing lately. I've been reading this book lately, regarding effective patterns in consensus meeting management: http://www.amazon.com/Consensus-Through-Conversation-High-Commitment-Decis io ns/dp/1576754197 For the Proposals section, I'd like to try this, which is suggested in the book: 1. A call for any open issues that we want to discuss 2. The issue is stated clearly and written up in the minutes while the author to check that they are happy with the description 3. We take a few seconds to quietly reflect on the issue 4. A count of who has concerns and who is unable to support the proposed solution 5. Those who support the solution stay quiet while concerned people get turns describing their view, which is written into the minutes. No discussion of blocks yet! 6. Everyone takes turns providing information or suggestions to modify the solution, until concerns are addressed 7. Blockers take turns explaining why they are blocking, along with their alternative suggestion If you're blocking, you're *required* to provide an alternative! Otherwise, the block doesn't count. 8. Repeat 3 through 7 until we have consensed! Consensus, much like any other structure, only works if the facilitator is willing to put the effort and energy in to making it work. The facilitator isn't a source of authority. The group doesn't serve them, the facilitator serves the group. Their primary goal is making sure that everyone works together to come up with a solution that we can all support by helping the group figure out if solutions and issues are personal in nature or if they're really in the best interest of
[SH-Discuss] new photos on the display wall
FYI Another glitch and a delay of a day or two. There will be another 15 or so 4x6 photos added to the display wall at SH later this week. I just cancelled the current print order at Walgreens for some 4x6 prints because the greedy corporate bastards hiked the price per print from $0.20 each to $0.29 each - almost a 50% increase. Sams Club will get all my future 4x6 print orders. Their charge is only $0.17 each for a very nice 4x6 print. They do all my big prints, so I know what to expect. The prints that will go up this week are the ones I took last Saturday, after the robot club meeting. All the images were uploaded to my Flickr account yesterday, if you would like to view or share them. PPP ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[SH-Discuss] Hackerspace Questionnaire for Creation of High School Hackerspace
Hello, I was hoping that you guys at Syn/Hak might be able to help me out. My name is Kayla and I am a hacker and a PhD student at Georgia Tech investigating makerspaces and hackerspaces as a way to expose high school students from underserved communities to computer science and engineering. Most of these students do not have access to many of the tools and resources to get them involved in computer science and engineering at a young age. I am investigating how people work and learn in these spaces so that I can take what I learn and apply it to an infrastructure I am creating for these students. I would greatly appreciate it if you would participate in my survey on Google Formshttps://docs.google.com/forms/d/179cUJZ9NSBEbWjlUlliingHKhK5Da61Moo11e1OySZs/viewform to help me in this endeavor. Here is the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/179cUJZ9NSBEbWjlUlliingHKhK5Da61Moo11e1OySZs/viewform Thanks for taking the time! ~Kayla Kayla DesPortes PhD Candidate Human Centered Computing Georgia Institute of Technology ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[SH-Discuss] T-shirts wanted
So I have some projects that I want to work on. These projects require the hacking of old t shirts . So if any member has old t-shirts that they would like to see up cycled please feel free to bring them in and drop them off in the craft room. Please do not bring in shirts that you want back or don't want cut up please don't bring them in . They will be altered in Many different ways. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[SH-Discuss] Tonight's meeting
Everyone was incredibly Excellent tonight. Thank you to all who participated. Feedback and comments on my moderation are encouraged and appreciated. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [SH-Discuss] Tonight's meeting
Two points about what I liked - 1. I like the meeting area arranged in a circular fashion, like knights of the round table. Works so much better than the random seating of previous meetings. 2. I like the fact that the meeting lasted less than two hours. One hour is a good target length for an organized, effective meeting. And, two points about what I did not like - 1. I did not like the late starting time. If the meeting is scheduled for 7pm, then start the meeting at 7pm. 2. I did not like the assorted members and non-members who were conducting conversations in the back area, near the meeting, but not part of the meeting. It was happening throughout the meeting, but got increasingly worse towards the end. Their actions were an interference and distraction to the speakers and listeners alike. That kind of selfish behavior is rude and unnecessary and should not be tolerated. I was hoping you would say something to them about the noise level and/or ask them to leave the area. On a final note, you did a fine job as moderator tonight. Philip On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:35 PM, Torrie Fischer tdfisc...@hackerbots.netwrote: Everyone was incredibly Excellent tonight. Thank you to all who participated. Feedback and comments on my moderation are encouraged and appreciated. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [SH-Discuss] Tonight's meeting
On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 22:50:47 Philip P. Patnode wrote: Two points about what I liked - 1. I like the meeting area arranged in a circular fashion, like knights of the round table. Works so much better than the random seating of previous meetings. Yes. As I was setting up the chairs earlier today, I was reminded of the first meeting of Maker's Alliance that Chris, Ricky, and I went to two years ago - back when they were restarting the group at a local community center. We all sat in a circle; nobody was rising above anyone else; Everyone could see eye to eye. In fact at that meeting, the moderator kinda just sprouted up from a random newbie who was there for their first time (Joe Goerse, if I remember). There was no differentiation between who was actually involved with the first iteration of MA and someone who moved to Cleveland the week earlier. 2. I like the fact that the meeting lasted less than two hours. One hour is a good target length for an organized, effective meeting. Agreed. I think that tonight's duration was a significant improvement over previous meetings. I would like to consider a meeting with some more intense time keeping (i.e. any), or perhaps being more forceful in getting people to wrap up. A lot of us tend to ramble and restate the same idea a few times. Perhaps an alternative to time keeping, which can quickly cut someone off when they don't feel that they have articulated the idea, is to limit things to just one sentence or question at a time. This is concise enough for the note-taker to write down, and encourages everyone to be more specific and thoughtful with what they say. Another option that I was hoping to use tonight but didn't because I think it may have been a bit too much for a meeting that hasn't been done in this style in a long while is to have a simple queue of questions and statements. For example: * Alice states the problem they perceive. * Alice then states their suggested solution * Everyone is given a turn to list any questions or concerns they have. Nobody gives any answers yet! * Once that round is done, everyone addresses each concern or question that is on the projector screen line by line. It shouldn't become a QA with the proposer. I feel that there were a few points tonight where it ended up being a rapid dialogue between two people, and nobody else could contribute with suggestions. And, two points about what I did not like - 1. I did not like the late starting time. If the meeting is scheduled for 7pm, then start the meeting at 7pm. I think part of that was the general unwillingness of those present to play note-taker. I have an idea for next week that I plan on trying out involving a lot more group assistance of the note-taker and asking that everyone be a lot more vigilant about watching what gets written down. After the meeting, I talked with our guest note taker and she commented that she was at first very overwhelmed with the pace of the meeting and didn't expect it to actually get that detailed. I think it would be incredibly helpful if we paused after each person's turn to both reflect and make sure that the note taker got things down right. The downside to this is that the meeting might take a while longer, or we won't be able to get through as much content as others would like. Alternative suggestions and ideas are welcome. 2. I did not like the assorted members and non-members who were conducting conversations in the back area, near the meeting, but not part of the meeting. It was happening throughout the meeting, but got increasingly worse towards the end. Their actions were an interference and distraction to the speakers and listeners alike. That kind of selfish behavior is rude and unnecessary and should not be tolerated. I was hoping you would say something to them about the noise level and/or ask them to leave the area. If someone is being rude, please call them out on it! I was sitting on the very far end of the room so that I could easily keep an eye on who was entering and leaving the discussion. I actually had no idea that those folks on the other side were so disruptive. My assumption was that because nobody was saying anything, they weren't being distracting. My interpretation of the role of moderator is exactly whats on the tin. The moderator is just there to make sure everyone gets along and that the meeting is productive. I'm paying a lot of attention to the discussion at hand, making sure that people who raise their hands are called on in the appropriate order, ensuring that the discussion doesn't veer off into a completely different direction, keeping an eye on the minutes to make sure everyone's point is written down, and watching the general vibe of the meeting. As I found out tonight, keeping track of all that stuff leaves very little room in my head to watch outsiders. On a final note, you did a fine job as moderator
