[hackerspaces] Discuss Digest, Vol 33, Issue 12

[Matt Joyce]

I think makers and soft hackers can find themselves at odds.  Some folks get
pissed when loud machinery fires up and grinds metal.  So there are some
culture issues.
On May 6, 2011 5:48 PM, "Danozano" <danozano at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it really boils down to, are these people going to be fun,
interesting, and useful to hang out with? Business geeks who aren't hackerly
in their ways fail this test, at least for me.
>
> I will call them when I want to have flex office space away from my home
area, or if I want business-related stuff that they'd be best at --
networking, who's got good printing prices, recommendations of a place to
eat on a conference trip, or whatever -- and if they suck at that I might
not call them for it again. I won't call them looking for a piece of
electronics gear, or for a hand figuring out a technical detail of a
project, just like i wouldn't contact noninterested members of our own space
for that kind of stuff. They serve a different purpose in the toolbox.
>
> And if they had a mystery piece of hardware I hope they could remember 23b
shop is good for some things like that, and to call us to find who or what
is next in their chain of actions or contacts. It's a purely functional
definition for me. If they can help, I hope to call them; if not, no call.
Know they're around, don't bother them with details unrelated to their
strong points. Non-geeks might benefit in their way from rubbing against our
groups. And we might benefit in turn from their contacts, whether they are a
knowledgeable party or just a connector for us.
>
> To win is to use tools for a useful purpose. Reviews and subjective
impressions support this well. The more subjective and analytical, the
better.
>
> Danozano
>
>
> On May 6, 2011, at 10:36 AM, discuss-request at lists.hackerspaces.org wrote:
>
> IMO, companies that don't self identify as hackerspaces or makerspaces
that
> are using the list are just spammers. They might be nice spammers who we
can
> work with in the real world, but they're still spammers.
>
> This isn't about pushing one definition of hackerspace on the world, it's
> about, um, actually using the definitions people give themselves.
>
> Ratings does seem like a reasonable way to deal with this.
>
> I don't know. This is all a discussion about the feel of a space and what
> makes it a hackerspace. This is the sort of thing that's probably
impossible
> to define and difficult to discuss, though I think it's worth having at
> least a discussion about the geography of what's out there.
>
> Instead of hijacking this thread, I think I'll start a new one :)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20110506/3a5edae9/attachment-0001.htm>