[hackerspaces] In defense of Noisebridge (even if I was never there!)

Thu Jul 3 20:22:25 CEST 2014

It's more of a church with beer.

On 03/07/2014 11:21, Joe Bowser wrote:
> We're a "movement"?
>
> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Colin Keigher
> <general at keyboardcowboy.ca> wrote:
>> Please stop calling it "civic hacking". It's called "activism" and it has no
>> business in the hackerspace movement.
>>
>>
>> On 03/07/2014 11:15, Randall G. Arnold wrote:
>>
>> So Colin, are you then philosophically opposed to civic hacking?  Do you see
>> it as out of scope for a maker/hacker space?  If so, do you have an
>> alternative in mind for an organizing body?  Truly curious.
>>
>> Randy
>>
>>
>> On July 3, 2014 at 1:09 PM Colin Keigher <general at keyboardcowboy.ca> wrote:
>>
>> I think that allowing a space to call itself a "hackerspace" while trying to
>> become something more poisons the movement for everyone else and likely
>> ruins it.
>>
>> Groups like IndyMedia failed because of their insistence on promoting a
>> viewpoint that was extreme. This viewpoint ended up coming into play because
>> of individuals who got involved who had certain attitudes. It is these same
>> types of individuals who contributed to IMCs being looked down upon. Tragedy
>> of the commons really played a role in making IndyMedia irrelevant.
>>
>> This same plague that took down many of the IMCs is the same plague that can
>> take over a hackerspace. This is the plague you want to avoid if you want to
>> make sure that your space does not end up trying to become something it has
>> no business becoming. Much of the problems that people want to tackle that
>> spaces have no business being a part of should be addressed in the public
>> sphere through government and political activism. A hackerspace should only
>> be there to provide tools to assist, not solutions.
>>
>> Asking for diversity in hackerspaces as a whole is going to lead to
>> hackerspaces being looked down upon and will lead to Noisebridge-esque jokes
>> being hackerspace-esque instead.
>>
>> - Colin
>>
>> On 03/07/2014 10:52, matt wrote:
>>
>> I'd think this strikes to the heart of defining the mission of a space.  At
>> NYC Resistor we went with Learn, Make, Share... but obviously we needed to
>> limit some other aspects of what we might accomplish in order to protect the
>> core mission.
>>
>> And that core mission really is the gooey center of our community.  It's
>> something we're all on board with.
>> So I think the question of politically activism in hackerspaces strikes to
>> the very core of a hackerspace as a community.  By being political you've
>> become unwelcoming to those who might disagree with your views, and your
>> goals.  You've focused more on building the community you want to be a part
>> of.
>> I'd say that's probably a good thing for those who are part of that
>> community and make that community a healthy one.
>>
>> That being said, I think some communities are obviously toxic... such as
>> what remains of Occupy.  And frankly, I'd say the same of Indymedia.  It's
>> interesting as it drives to the core of how do you cultivate and how do you
>> define the metric of success for a healthy community?
>> At the same time there is the dichotomy of hackerspace as a public utility
>> rather than as a community.  My library is not a place I go to enjoy the
>> company of my peers.  It's a place I go to get access to shared knowledge in
>> the form of books.  And that's great.
>> Some spaces may want to be ran as a public utility.  I think the noisebridge
>> model drove that direction.  But some of the members never could let go of
>> the idea of being a community and enjoying the benefits of that trust
>> relationship.  They couldn't reconcile the divide between hackerspace as a
>> public utility and hackerspace as a community.
>>
>> And I think at the core of this discussion is the question of whether or not
>> these two views are irreconcilable.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Randall G. Arnold
>> <randall.arnold at texrat.net> wrote:
>>
>> Texas politics are very polarized these days and get ugly quick, so we've
>> tried to get our community to leave that aspect of their lives at home.
>> There's a strong tea party undercurrent to our membership though, and it is
>> what it is.  So far people have been respectful enough to let the
>> provocative comments be, and we haven't had an issue.  Yet.
>>
>> That said, I'm not sure how that question came out of what I posted, which
>> was apolitical.  I do get that societal issues CAN get political, but we've
>> put a lot of effort into avoiding the polarizing aspects.  Things like clean
>> air and water aren't really political issues-- they're politicized by people
>> with non-maker agendas.  Restoring horned lizards cuts across all
>> demographics here-- everyone wants them brought back.  So in cases like
>> these, it's easy to pull together people of diverse political leanings.  We
>> put our focus on the COMMON goals.
>>
>> Randy
>> Tarrant Makers
>>
>>
>> On July 3, 2014 at 12:32 PM Al Billings < albill at openbuddha.com> wrote:
>>
>> Is your space welcoming to people, regardless of personal politics or do you
>> have to be a specific kind of lefty/socialist/anarchist/hippy/whatever in
>> order to be welcome?
>>
>> I say this as a socialist but I don’t want there to be a political litmus
>> test on whether people are welcome in a space. My space has members who,
>> quietly on occasion, bitch about Obama and his “agenda” with an eye roll
>> from some other members. We have a communist or two and probably more than a
>> few anarchists. Generally, I know someone for a year or more before I even
>> realize their personal politics. Why? Because we’re there to hack, not to
>> form a political party.
>>
>> There are definitely spaces where this isn’t the case. If you aren’t on
>> board with the specific local politics (which are usually a certain specific
>> form of left leaning anarchism), you are shunned pretty heavily and “don’t
>> fit in.” I’d rather have a Republican that wants to build a project from
>> salvaged computers than an anarchist that just wants to hang out in the
>> kitchen “food hacking.”
>>
>> Al
>>
>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 10:28 AM, Randall G. Arnold < randall.arnold at texrat.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I disagree when you frame that as an absolute.  Sure, there CAN be negative
>> outcomes when a maker/hacker space or organization has fixing societal
>> problems as a goal, but it ain't necessarily so.  It all comes down to
>> defining the goal(s), having people to support them and for members with
>> different goals to be respectful of each other and not get in each other's
>> way.
>>
>> If as a makerspace member I put together a special interest group that
>> builds remote wildlife monitoring stations for helping horned lizard
>> conservation, and I don't disrupt anyone else in the process, then I'm
>> positively hacking the planet and no one gets hurt.  Win-win.
>>
>>
>> Al Billings
>> albill at openbuddha.com
>> http://makehacklearn.org
>>
>>
>>
>> Randall (Randy) Arnold
>> Developer and Enthusiast Advocate
>> http://texrat.net
>> +18177396806
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss