[hackerspaces] Hackerspaces Re:Foundation (Was Re: Abuse Of Power)

hellekin hellekin at hackerspaces.org
Sat Apr 13 21:04:43 CEST 2013

Hash: SHA512

On 04/13/2013 03:45 PM, Matt Joyce wrote:
> The Long:
> 5 years ago hackerspaces.org was new and wonderful, and the
> community was alive with excitement.  Today, there are more hackers
> / makers / crafters / artists / scientists / engineers / zomg etc
> than ever before helping build hackerspace communities across the
> globe.
> Yet, hackerspaces.org is fundamentally nothing more than a map of
> existing hackerspaces and this mailing list.  It could be so much
> more than that. Today Makerspaces is making a play on being that
> more for hackerspaces. But it's not an impartial effort.  It's got
> a specific financial interest and it's owned by O'Rly.  We're the
> communities resourc and we're not acting like it.
> And while there have been some attempts to grow a blog, and grow
> out some other feature sets.  Nothing has really caught on.  I
> think ultimately the problem is that the hackerspaces.org site and
> resources are privately owned.  I think disputes like this and
> small working groups are the reason that things fail.  This "all
> someone needs to do is ask."  approach is unacceptable to those of
> us who don't really want to ask to help.  We want to just solve
> problems and let it be reviewed and accepted as needed.  More 
> continuous integration less QQ.
> Generally I am of the opinion that what is needed is a more open
> peer reviewed contribution system.  Leadership and Stewardship irk
> me.  Hackers don't need governance.  And I am more than willing to
> have my public image besmirched without getting butt hurt as your
> figurehead to blame for all things.  However, the resources that
> need to be operated to run hackerspaces.org require investment, and
> someone or something needs to be the 'owner' of things.
> Maybe what we need is a foundation.  But a foundation that's
> designed to service the community and not vice versa.  One where
> leadership is disassociated from development.  Where the leaders
> exist for the sole purpose of safe guarding the public image of the
> org and promoting hackerspaces while simply allowing and supporting
> the individual contributors.
*** Hey Matt,

I tend to agree with your view that a more peer-to-peer organization
would be interesting. Federating resources from various hackerspaces,
e.g. the Mediawiki contents, etc., projects, and more. It's been the
case, although marginal.

The main concern, as you nailed it, is available spare time, and the
lack of regular concerted action. These things come and go. Priorities
change. Efforts fade into oblivion. Without a clear pattern,
cooperation only occur at the margins. Of course we can always do better.

For my tiny part, I'm saddened with the uselessness of the
Hackerspaces planet. There was a brief interest in it a few months
ago, but instead of working together on making it right, it forked
into two moribund projects. The solution seems pretty simple: have the
planet automated from the entries in the wiki.

http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Call-in died in 2011, or is it just the
record? http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Synchronous_Hackathon 5 months
didn't happen either anymore. So, there's an obvious shift of
attention away from the cooperative part of hackerspaces--I have no
doubt that locally, things are thriving, as the growing number of
spaces show.

I'm not sure though, that incorporating a foundation would help bring
attention back. I'm not sure either it wouldn't. Thought?

Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


More information about the Discuss mailing list