[sudoroom] Clothing Hack-a-thon

Tracy Jacobs kinetical at comcast.net
Mon Aug 13 00:33:33 CEST 2012 


>
> Rachel,
>
> Are you still up for doing a clothing Hack-a-thon at the next Art  
> Murmur?  I've been looking into getting some conductive thread and  
> batteries to put some light on things but it looks like it will cost  
> about $50 .  It would be great if we could get people to share this  
> expense as they will be given away to people at the show.  Anyone  
> care to donate/participate?
>
> Tracy
>
>
> On Jul 1, 2012, at 10:17 PM, rachel lyra hospodar wrote:
>
>> In my understanding, we have not yet defined how the council is  
>> formed??
>> Maybe this is like a jury or something in the sense that it's an ad  
>> hoc
>> working group, pulled from the general body of participants, as a  
>> way of
>> keeping the whole group from having to spend its time doing every  
>> single
>> step of the proposal writing process.  Although if someone has an  
>> issue,
>> or wants to bring a proposal, there should be a way in our process  
>> for
>> them to be the ones creating the forward motion.
>>
>> R.
>>
>> On 7/1/2012 9:04 PM, Jehan Tremback wrote:
>>> So from my understanding, the "council" is there to provide a  
>>> sense of
>>> responsibility and a "buck stopping" function? Same reason for the
>>> executive branch in many democracies?
>>>
>>> It strikes me that the council wields a form of absolute control  
>>> over
>>> the formalized decisionmaking process. If the council does not  
>>> bring a
>>> proposal forward, it is not voted or consensed on. The council has
>>> absolute veto power in effect. Is this something we want? Or am I
>>> misunderstanding something?
>>>
>>> -jehan
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 8:49 PM, rachel lyra hospodar
>>> <rachelyra at gmail.com <mailto:rachelyra at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>   Hey friends,
>>>
>>>   This is all super exciting!  I am sorry I had to miss last  
>>> meeting, it
>>>   sounds like some awesome stuff happened.  I have spent some time  
>>> reading
>>>   notes and checking out what is on the wiki, and I have taken the  
>>> liberty
>>>   of making some edits.  Just trying to put some info together and  
>>> tease
>>>   out some next steps, but I am open to feedback rejection etc on my
>>>   changes.
>>>
>>>   http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/Governance_Structure
>>>
>>>   I'm going to keep playing around for a little bit.  I am  
>>> grateful to the
>>>   group for the opportunity to facilitate the meeting last time.   
>>> It's
>>>   interesting how different it is with every group.  I am still  
>>> learning a
>>>   lot about how to do this kind of thing and it is great to be  
>>> able to
>>>   practice.  Overall I felt like the style of facilitation I am  
>>> used to
>>>   was too formal for the Sudoroom and am curious to see what  
>>> evolves for
>>>   this group.
>>>
>>>   Also the event I was working on First Friday has been postponed  
>>> so I am
>>>   hoping to participate that evening!
>>>
>>>   <3
>>>   R.
>>>
>>>   On 6/29/2012 10:49 AM, Eddan Katz wrote:
>>>> Thank you again Victoria for starting us off with this succinct  
>>>> text.
>>>>
>>>> As I had mentioned in our smaller group in the Sudo Grotto, I  
>>>> think it
>>>> would be useful to set time periods for types of editing and
>>>   commenting
>>>> to maintain focus and momentum. This can also be useful in  
>>>> preventing
>>>> the misuse of the discussion period as a method of consensus
>>>   blocking. I
>>>> had suggested three stages -
>>>>
>>>> (1) overall & big picture comments;
>>>> (2) paragraph and/or issue level comments; and
>>>> (3) word choice and meme level comments
>>>>
>>>> The time periods for each should be flexible, as reflected in the
>>>> friendly amendment in the minutes, but most significantly - big
>>>   picture
>>>> comments should be reserved for the beginning of the discussion,  
>>>> imho,
>>>> and precluded from diverting consensus at the last minute. This
>>>> differentiation of stages of drafting can also be made to signal to
>>>> people with casual interest, but not detail level participation  
>>>> in the
>>>> discussion, to what stage the discussion has progressed. In the
>>>> Trans-Atlantic Consumer Dialogue (http://www.tacd.org) - the  
>>>> working
>>>> groups flagged these stages (i.e., brown draft, red draft, blue  
>>>> draft)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Big Picture Comments:
>>>>
>>>> So in terms of overall comments, it seems to me worthwhile to
>>>   focus some
>>>> of our deliberation on Note A below:
>>>> [The "Council" could be comprised of elected representatives (or
>>>> volunteers, or super-volunteers). TBD.]
>>>>
>>>> 1. From my perspective, /who/ makes the decision can be more
>>>   significant
>>>> than /how/ the decision is made. Some initial questions that come  
>>>> to
>>>> mind --
>>>>
>>>> Who makes up this Council? And why them and not others? Are those  
>>>> not
>>>> participating doing so because of disinterest and/or exclusion?  
>>>> Does
>>>> this group of people constitute a representation of the whole body,
>>>> however that is determined?
>>>>
>>>> 2. It is worth considering whether or not there should be checks  
>>>> and
>>>> balances between the Council and the whole body in terms of
>>>> decision-making. Perhaps the people on the Council developing an
>>>   idea or
>>>> proposal should be separated to some extent from the decision  
>>>> process,
>>>> in order to avoid undue influence?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Victoria Bogdan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Sudos,
>>>>>
>>>>> As we all know, the time is nigh to develop a way to make  
>>>>> decisions.
>>>>> And decide we must on these important first steps! :) Afterall, we
>>>>> still need to figure out *membership, governance*, *bylaws, *and  
>>>>> many
>>>>> more things.
>>>>>
>>>>> After our consensus talks over the past few weeks I figured,  
>>>>> what the
>>>>> heck, let me put a *draft *set of guidelines out there so that the
>>>>> group has something to respond to. Maybe we can debate this and  
>>>>> hack
>>>>> it out on Wednesday?
>>>>>
>>>>> And please note: there is a burdgeoning discussion on the Sudo  
>>>>> Wiki
>>>>> about how other hackerspaces run their business here
>>>>> <http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Sudo_room/research>.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, so how's this for a starting simple draft....
>>>>> Based on "Consensus Decision Making w/ Consensus Blocking
>>>>>
>>>   <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making#Consensus_decision-making_with_consensus_blocking 
>>> >"
>>>>> , the short of it would be:
>>>>>
>>>>> *Premise:* A decision needs to be made.
>>>>> *Step 1:* Discuss at large in the group (with a time limit, and/or
>>>>> feedback can be gathered online instead of taking in-person
>>>   meeting time)
>>>>> *Step 2:* A Council takes this "raw material" and generates a
>>>   proposal
>>>>> *Step 3:* The Council puts the proposal to the group for  
>>>>> amendments &
>>>>> voting. We can do majority vote or total consensus. If the vote  
>>>>> is a
>>>>> "no", the Council goes back and drafts another proposal.
>>>>> *End Result:* A decision is made
>>>>>
>>>>> *Note A: *The "Council" could be comprised of elected  
>>>>> representatives
>>>>> (or volunteers, or super-volunteers). TBD.
>>>>> *Note B: *I'm seeing that the tool of "blocking" can be used in
>>>>> consensus voting, but some groups think of it more as a nuclear
>>>   option
>>>>> (hence the opportunity to offer amendments and give feedback).
>>>   This is
>>>>> something else for us to figure out.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://victoriabogdan.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sudoroom mailing list
>>>>> sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>   <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org>
>>>   <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>   <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org>>
>>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sudoroom mailing list
>>>> sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>>   <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org>
>>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>   sudoroom mailing list
>>>   sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org <mailto:sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org 
>>> >
>>>   http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudoroom mailing list
>> sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudoroom mailing list
> sudoroom at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/sudoroom

More information about the sudoroom mailing list