[SpaceProgram] Request: accountability frameworks for makerspace governance?
Sam Tobin
sam.tobin at nrsnz.com
Fri May 27 04:15:27 CEST 2016
Hi Paul
"However, I would argue that this often relies on existing organisational structures and constitutions, either implicit or explicit, and that scaling this is possible but often problematic"
If you argued that, I'd agree. 😀
Cheers
Sam
Sent from mobile device
> On 27/05/2016, at 11:53 AM, Paul Szymkowiak <paulszym at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Having been involved in the "hackerspace space program" and the subsequent "Space GAMBIT" projects being discussed here from the beginning, and also having been a moderator for previous interactions Michael Turner has had on mailing lists associated with these efforts, I'd like to add a few comments.
>
> Sam, I have also worked with a number of philanthropist groups, and I agree it is possible - for certain types of projects in certain contexts - to remain focused on an outcome and operate predominantly on trust. However, I would argue that this often relies on existing organisational structures and constitutions, either implicit or explicit, and that scaling this is possible but often problematic (in my experience, most cases fail).
>
> In the case of Space GAMBIT, we attempted to form a globally operating entity (or network of) based on a significant founding grant under a highly regulated set of industry rules and regulations. I think that makes this context significantly different and the associated problems much more wicked. If we're to contemplate further space-program efforts within the global maker & hacker hobbyist communities, we need to learn from the mistakes made here and find a better way forward.
>
> I think Michael's request to discuss accountability frameworks is a completely reasonable proposal, and in light of the serious failings in the execution of the Space GAMBIT effort, completely justified. In the past, I've critiqued Michael for personal attacks, but I'm not seeing that in this case: I'm seeing what I consider quite reasonable critique: and given that I'm one of the people that critique is directed at, I welcome it.
>
> From my perspective, Michael's request is an important and valid one in the light of Space GAMBIT, and so-far I haven't seen anything in the way of constructive response. Does that mean that no such accountability framework(s) exist in the hacker/ maker community, and that we're all operating on systems based on good will, trust and personal integrity?
>
> If not, I'd welcome folks sharing their experiences with suitable frameworks they've found workable. If so, I'd echo Michael's concern that when donors are contributing significant funds, good will, trust and personal integrity aren't enough to support such endeavours, and in the case of Space GAMBIT, failed horribly. It's completely justifiable and I think helpful, to look back on the mistake, critique it and learn from it so that we can avoid making it again.
>
> I don't necessarily subscribe to Michael's statement "every iota of effort on funded projects can be tracked, and every penny of spending can be recorded". There are various ways in which "every iota" and "every penny" might be problematic, however I think the general idea of tracking spending, revenue, effort, assets (including intellectual property) is completely reasonable - in fact, needed - and there should be ways to do this transparently and simply as a natural part of doing work on the project.
>
> In some ways, we're looking at how open communities can operate in a way true to our ethics and principles, within required legislative structures that are arguably based on dated western ideals of organisations/ legal entities. We need supporting structures and systems that allow us to operate legally and with manageable risk within the existing overarching system(s).
>
> If anything, Michael has been somewhat charitable in his critique. When Michael says "the dodge took the form of locating all authority over spending that $500,000 in a tiny handful of people who operated in a pretty opaque fashion", it would be more accurate to say that, once the funding landed, "in the hands of a single person".
>
> That was never the intention of the project, went against everything the group had specifically worked hard on over many months on the grant application, and ultimately destroyed the global collaborative nature of the project. Once that occurred, there seemed to be no way back from that fatal mistake, and that cast the actions of the individual involved in an increasingly negative light. It was easy to paint a picture alleging corruption, although I suspect it was predominantly a mix of overbearing control-freak personality and personal financial fear.
>
> This is an important community failure that I for one am keen to learn from, never repeat, and find better ways of undertaking in the future.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Paul
>
> Paul Szymkowiak
>
>
>> On 27 May 2016 at 08:43, Sam Tobin <sam.tobin at nrsnz.com> wrote:
>> Diminishing return guys/girls...
>>
>> I've worked on large ESA projects with massive overheads and scrutiny, and on tiny garage-based projects. Accountability, workplans etc are tools... and as always one needs the right tools for the task at hand.
>>
>> I've also worked for a philanthropist group, and (might be unique, but maybe not)... they were mostly interested in outcomes, not details. Simply put, the approach was to trust the person/group, check outcomes, repeat with person/group at larger $ scale if good.
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> Sam
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 27 May 2016 at 05:08, Michael Turner <michael.eugene.turner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm sure that's been your experience, Matt. Subjectively, it has also been mine. I've chafed under accountability frameworks in almost every organization I've ever been in. They've always felt like a "massive, worthless drain."
>>>
>>> Here's the thing, though: the ones that didn't have them, fell apart. Sometimes in very embarrassing ways. And one thing I've learned in trying to work with nonprofits in some parts of the world is that if you ask for accountability, and get only indignation in response, you're better off turning away and not bothering with those people ever again. They are on the take. I don't want to be like them. When potential donors say, "I need to look at how you spend money," I want to be in a position throw all the verification at them that they could possibly want, and more. They'll want to know that the level of parasitism in my organization is acceptably low. How can I blame them?
>>>
>>> Permit a biological metaphor: a fair amount of any creature's metabolism goes into supporting its immune system. It's a lot. It's a massive, worthless drain, actually. Until there's an infection, or a cluster of mutant cells that might turn into a malignant tumor.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Michael Turner
>>> Executive Director
>>> Project Persephone
>>> K-1 bldg 3F
>>> 7-2-6 Nishishinjuku
>>> Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0023
>>> Tel: +81 (3) 6890-1140
>>> Fax: +81 (3) 6890-1158
>>> Mobile: +81 (90) 5203-8682
>>> turner at projectpersephone.org
>>> http://www.projectpersephone.org/
>>>
>>> "Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 1:26 AM, Silence Dogood <matt at nycresistor.com> wrote:
>>>> In my experience, working for a space agency, people who are interested in "setting up a framework in which every iota of effort on funded projects can be tracked, and every penny of spending can be recorded." are usually a massive worthless drain on the project and very interested in inserting themselves in places they have no earthly business being, just to justify their continued leeching upon the project. And, more often then not, they cost more than they benefit anyone... not just in fiduciary cost, but in time, complexity, and general nuisance factor introduced into the day to day operational workflow of the group working on the project.
>>>>
>>>> -Matt
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Michael Turner <michael.eugene.turner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Matt, in my experience of hackerspaces, there's lots of bitter argument by people who aren't contributing much of anything, much of the time. I tried. Eventually, I walked. I contributed time, money, equipment, project ideas ... but ultimately, I walked. I felt pretty alienated by know-it-all attitudes and a kind of knee-jerk anti-authoritarianism that prefers unproductive chaos to reasonable order.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, again:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm interested in setting up a framework in which every iota of effort on funded projects can be tracked, and every penny of spending can be recorded. I'm interested in this because I'll need donors at some point, and donors typically require high transparency -- and results. I'd like to hear from makerspace leaders who've been successful at setting up such frameworks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Michael Turner
>>>>> Executive Director
>>>>> Project Persephone
>>>>> K-1 bldg 3F
>>>>> 7-2-6 Nishishinjuku
>>>>> Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0023
>>>>> Tel: +81 (3) 6890-1140
>>>>> Fax: +81 (3) 6890-1158
>>>>> Mobile: +81 (90) 5203-8682
>>>>> turner at projectpersephone.org
>>>>> http://www.projectpersephone.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> "Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Silence Dogood <matt at nycresistor.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In open source, committers walk and everyone else talks... and is promptly ignored. If you think something can be done better, do it better. Leadership is an act of demonstrating a better path forward. Decrying folks is not productive. We know success when we see it, everything else is just more of the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, stop bitching, and go make a difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Matt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Michael Turner <michael.eugene.turner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> "You have to admit, Michael, that nearly every email you've sent has been a slash and burn."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm destructive? What's more destructive: criticism of corruption, or corruption?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Michael Turner
>>>>>>> Executive Director
>>>>>>> Project Persephone
>>>>>>> K-1 bldg 3F
>>>>>>> 7-2-6 Nishishinjuku
>>>>>>> Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0023
>>>>>>> Tel: +81 (3) 6890-1140
>>>>>>> Fax: +81 (3) 6890-1158
>>>>>>> Mobile: +81 (90) 5203-8682
>>>>>>> turner at projectpersephone.org
>>>>>>> http://www.projectpersephone.org/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 12:57 AM, David <ainut at hiwaay.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> You have to admit, Michael, that nearly every email you've sent
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 05/18/2016 11:02 AM, cole santos wrote:has been a slash and burn.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> David Merchant
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lol you just don't get it troll
>>>>>>>>>> On May 18, 2016 1:03 AM, "Michael Turner" <michael.eugene.turner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Mike no one wanted to work with you because of emails like you just sent."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I thought there should be more openness and oversight, and so nobody wanted to work with me? Interesting. I hadn't realized that openness and oversight were such unpopular things when spending taxpayers money. Unless, of course, you're a taxpayer. Are you?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Since I wrote the grant, and got the Corp formed, and followed through until the project start, I think it's ok moraly."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I always assumed an education in philosophy would acquaint a person with the difference between morals and ethics. You learn something every day, I guess.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Michael Turner
>>>>>>>>>> Executive Director
>>>>>>>>>> Project Persephone
>>>>>>>>>> K-1 bldg 3F
>>>>>>>>>> 7-2-6 Nishishinjuku
>>>>>>>>>> Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0023
>>>>>>>>>> Tel: +81 (3) 6890-1140
>>>>>>>>>> Fax: +81 (3) 6890-1158
>>>>>>>>>> Mobile: +81 (90) 5203-8682
>>>>>>>>>> turner at projectpersephone.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.projectpersephone.org/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 1:48 AM, cole santos <cksantos85 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Mike no one wanted to work with you because of emails like you just sent. We are amateurs hacking it. Ps haesh was my project and it was somewhat a sweetheart deal. I had to choose between a project or a job. Since I wrote the grant, and got the Corp formed, and followed through until the project start, I think it's ok moraly. The other projects were all random submissions. The principal aka jerry got overwhelmed and didn't even really want the job. I kinda forced it on him as I had a full time job. Reality is not nearly as sensational as u wish.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 16, 2016 9:07 PM, "Michael Turner" <michael.eugene.turner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> First things first:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm interested in setting up a framework in which every iota of effort on funded projects can be tracked, and every penny of spending can be recorded. I'm interested in this because I'll need donors at some point, and donors typically require high transparency -- and results. I'd like to hear from makerspace leaders who've been successful at setting up such frameworks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, about the "drama":
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 2:51 AM, gmc <gmc at hackerspaces.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yay, drama. It's what hackers are best at! Bye bye mailing list.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Clearly, some disillusionment and malaise has set in.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hackerspaces.org? No blog update since just about two years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Interesting critique there, though:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://flux.hackerspaces.org/2014/01/19/diversity-and-the-hacker-scene/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Drama will never go away permanently. Sometimes the only way to quell drama is with rules.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you're going to have rules, you can try counting on ideas like legitimizing all decisions through the rule of relying on consensus (it always breaks down). Or on rules set by some "benevolent oligarchy" (the "oligarchs" often get tired of arbitration and moderation, and go missing.) There are a variety of other dodges of the basic responsibility of collective governance, which is tedious and stressful compared to making things.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In the case of SpaceGAMBIT, the dodge took the form of locating all authority over spending that $500,000 in a tiny handful of people who operated in a pretty opaque fashion. In at least one case, the opacity was defended by a SpaceGAMBIT principal in terms of DARPA's tight regulations about the release of information. When I asked for chapter and verse of those regulations, there was no answer. Wait: you're saying you got money from a government agency that doesn't tell taxpayers the basis on which it allows awarded organizations to release information about how taxpayer money is being spent? Interesting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Given the nature of the political differences over taking money from DARPA, I can see a reason for not identifying winning teams when the awards went out. It might have been defensible as a way to protect the awarded teams from harassment by those who were most loudly opposed to that money, and to what any hackerspace group taking that money symbolized to them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The problem was: opacity could enable sweetheart deals. Waste. Lax controls.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And what do we have at the end?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Examples:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> $20,000 for an open source satellite mission design project that apparently never checked anything into a repo.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The HAESH project, which, by some odd coincidence, was based in Hawaii. (And apparently on Maui.)That was statistically unlikely, especially when you consider that the main SpaceGAMBIT executive exulted at one point about how great it was to work internationally, not just in America, and not just in his tiny home region of -- you guessed it -- Hawaii. Maui, in fact.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about the thousands of dollars for the open source Make-a-Space Kit? It had a laudable goal.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "The goal of this project is to complete the content--finalize the entire kit-- and then create a turn-key online template which a new or existing space can use to instantiate the online project management, assign specific tasks to board members, track accountability, and effectively communicate about the status of the activities as the space is launched and formed."
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is it? Dead links on the SpaceGAMBIT site. Try to get something back from the Wayback Machine? Unsuccessful.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about that Asteroid Badge?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/CuriosityHacked/Learning/wiki/SpaceAsteroids
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There's something in there that looks like a rough draft of Make-a-Space Kit, but certainly nothing that looks "finalized."
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thousands of dollars spent on those two projects. And this is all there is to show for it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's what happens when there's no openness or accountability, and when money can be spent without significant oversight by a small group of people.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to repeat my request:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm interested in setting up a framework in which every iota of effort on funded projects can be tracked, and every penny of spending can be recorded. I'm interested in this because I'll need donors at some point, and donors typically require high transparency -- and results. I'd like to hear from makerspace leaders who've been successful at setting up such frameworks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Turner
>>>>>>>>>>>> Executive Director
>>>>>>>>>>>> Project Persephone
>>>>>>>>>>>> K-1 bldg 3F
>>>>>>>>>>>> 7-2-6 Nishishinjuku
>>>>>>>>>>>> Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0023
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tel: +81 (3) 6890-1140
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fax: +81 (3) 6890-1158
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile: +81 (90) 5203-8682
>>>>>>>>>>>> turner at projectpersephone.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.projectpersephone.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 16 May 2016 18:26:04 CEST, Michael Turner <michael.eugene.turner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:55 AM, cole santos <cksantos85 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually we took the DarPA money and the project was a great success. Www.spacegambit.Com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A great success for some people, I suppose. In a certain sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I pick a project at random.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.spacegambit.org/satstatsim/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Funding: $20,000
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SpaceGAMBIT claim: only open source projects will be funded.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reality: well, ta! ke a look.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://satstatsim.blogspot.jp/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Excuse: "schedules slip". OK, but you can't check in any code, anywhere?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://code.google.com/archive/p/satstatsim/source
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At least, that's the only repo I could find.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There's nothing in it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was largely because of my concerns about openness, clear communication, democratic process, and leadership accountability that I decided to have nothing further to do with SpaceGAMBIT. This was after feeling enthusiastic about it and even defending it against what I thought was unfair criticism.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Really, I'd prefer to have been wrong in my suspicions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Turner
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Executive Director
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Project Persephone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> K-1 bldg 3F
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7-2-6 Nishishinjuku
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0023
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tel: +81 (3) 6890-1140
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fax: +81 (3) 6890-1158
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile: +81 (90) 5203-8682
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turner at projectpersephone.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.projectpersephone.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, May 16, 2016, Michael P Weber II <michaelweberii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:05 AM, Michael Turner
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <michael.eugene.turner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Whether intentional or not, the choice of watercress could be very
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > space-relevant.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > (1) Biosphere II saw the direct participation of the late Roy Walford, MD, a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > pioneer self-experimenter in CRON (calorie restriction with optimal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > nutrition) as a strategy for life extension. This research interested the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Biosphere II organizers because, in feeding long-duration space mission
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > participants, fewer calories eaten means, to a good first approximation,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > less mass for the ecological life support system, leading to lower mission
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > cost, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > (2) Research into how CRON appears to increase lifespans (in part by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > reducing cancer risk -- a big issue in space travel because of space
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > radiation) reveals that it's more about protein restriction than about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > calorie restriction per se.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > (3) Further research has suggested that it's specifically reduction of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > methionine intake that is the main driver of life extension in CRON (hence,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > presumably, lower cancer risk);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > (4) High-glycine diets sop up excess methionine. (To be sure: methionine is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > an essential amino acid; glycine is not. But it seems that with methionine,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > you can get too much of a good thing.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > (5) Watercress is very high in glycine, quite low in methionine. Watercress
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > might be ideal for offsetting the cancer risks from space radiation in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > long-duration space missions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I think a good next step in such work would be to try to optimize watercress
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > production in an aeroponic rather than a hydroponic style. Hydroponics is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > great, highly productive, but ... water is heavy. Aeroponics can give you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > much of the benefit of hydroponics but with a fraction of the equipment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > mass. Aeroponics should be more adaptable to low-g and microgravity
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > environments since it's not gravity-dependent -- it's basically just the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > deposition of nutrient-enriched mist droplets on plant roots. Aeroponics may
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > have gotten its start from NASA funding.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Michael Turner
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Executive Director
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Project Persephone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > K-1 bldg 3F
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > 7-2-6 Nishishinjuku
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0023
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Tel: +81 (3) 6890-1140
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Fax: +81 (3) 6890-1158
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Mobile: +81 (90) 5203-8682
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > turner at projectpersephone.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > http://www.projectpersephone.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > "Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Michael Turner
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you going to take over the list then?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ SpaceProgram mailing list SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ SpaceProgram mailing list SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ SpaceProgram mailing list SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>>>>>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>>>>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>>>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>
> _______________________________________________
> SpaceProgram mailing list
> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/spaceprogram/attachments/20160527/3b98263c/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the SpaceProgram
mailing list