[hackerspaces] New Member Vetting
ramgarden at gmail.com
Tue Sep 18 00:34:25 CEST 2012
At Makers Local 256 we have a paper application form that two board members
have to sign. But you have to show up and hang out and actually get to
know everyone while everyone gets to know you. Because we don't advertise
who the board members are you have to hang out enough to figure out who
they are AND get two of them to sign your application.
I don't think we've had anyone try to apply where no two board members
would sign but that's always a possibility if they were giving out bad juju.
Also I don't think we check IDs so the address and phone on our application
could very well be forged if someone were so inclined. Maybe we should
start checking IDs? I'll add this to our discussion at our next meeting.
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Edward L Platt <ed at elplatt.com> wrote:
> What are your goals for strengthening vetting? A lot will depend on that.
> At i3 Detroit, we're pretty much open to anyone who wants to be a member.
> We just record their home address and check their ID, and we don't require
> new members to be sponsored. We've never had any serious problems.
> The main thing I think we could improve is onboarding new members, and
> that potentially overlaps with vetting. I know some spaces require people
> to host classes and volunteer a certain amount before they can become
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Ben Brown <ben at generik.ca> wrote:
>> We've got an interesting topic going on our own discuss list about
>> strengthening membership vetting, spawning from a member's experience in
>> another organization that's now considering police checks for applicants.
>> Traditionally, we've had applicants show up to a few open nights before
>> the board votes on their application. Members who have qualms about that
>> applicant have 5 days to speak up before the application is considered.
>> So far we've only rejected a single person (because they didn't attend
>> enough open nights) but now thinking about it, most hackerspaces
>> (including ours) entrust a significant amount of equipment to people who
>> we've only had very limited contact. As we're quickly growing past our
>> founding members, I'm wondering how other hackerspaces have adapted?
>> A couple ideas being thrown around are police checks (which most members
>> are against), and having a member sponsor a new applicant (who risks
>> their own membership to support them).
>> What process does your space use and is it working/failing horribly?
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> Edward L. Platt
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Discuss