[hackerspaces] Safe Space Policies?

[Al Jigong Billings]

No because you're misreading what was said. If you're group is not
disenfranchised, you don't need special support. Try again.
On Jan 26, 2014 12:02 PM, "Volatile Compound" <volatilecompound at gmail.com>
wrote:

> The original quote was as follows:
>
> "It is not unreasonable to accomodate disenfranchised groups more than
> groups that are not."
>
> Note the use of the words 'more than' in the above statement.  That
> implies an enforced inequality, specifically in terms of accommodating one
> group in favour of another.
>
> Hopefully this has helped to clarify the matter for you.
>
> - skroo.
>
> On 1/26/14, 11:33 AM, Al Billings wrote:
>
>> How is accommodating disenfranchising groups somehow disenfranchising
>> another group? Do explain.
>>
>> --
>> Al Billings
>> http://www.openbuddha.com
>> http://makehacklearn.org
>>
>> On Sunday, January 26, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Volatile Compound wrote:
>>
>>  It is not unreasonable to accomodate disenfranchised groups more than
>>>> groups that are not.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So what you're saying is that in order to un-disenfranchise one group,
>>> you're intending to disenfranchise another.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140126/84d092a5/attachment.html>