Around the same time, there was a public service message with two guys
in a basement smoking weed. One of them said "I've been smoking
marijuana for years, and nothing happened to me." Then you hear
offstage "John, did you even look for a job today?" He replies "Yeah,
ma." Cue voiceover: "Do drugs... and NOTHING will happen to you, too."
Setting aside the anti-pot alarmism of the ad, I think there are few
worse epitaphs than "Nothing happened to him."
There is an episode of "Mork & Mindy" in which Mork receives a visit
from an insurance salesman. True to Mork's formula, the salesman has
to explain insurance, leading to a list of all the dangers and risks
in the world. When Mindy gets home, Mork has locked himself in a small
cage, where he intends to remain indefinitely for his own protection.
This happens from time to time on our mailing lists. The latest
example is a discussion in which serious arguments are being made that
our front door should not be transparent, even if it's bulletproof,
because then it might exhibit our accomplishments, and if people have
the opportunity to enjoy the awesomeness of i3Detroit facilities and
creations, they might steal them. When bulletproofing makes someone
feel insecure, you have to wonder where the insecurity really is, is
all I'm saying. What are we afraid of? Ferndale? If so, we should not
be there, maybe? The solution to not getting robbed is (A) try to be
around people you trust, and (B) accept that you still might be
robbed.
No argument should ever consist solely of "it decreases security, so
let's not do it." Being awesome always comes with a tradeoff in
security, if you try hard enough to find it. Which part you notice
more, the risk or the reward, is a personality thing. You've got to
have both of those personality types in an organization's culture. But
I would like to see more discussions of security measure the risk,
measure the reward, and then weigh them against each other.
Disclaimer: I freely admit I tend to be reward-focused and risk-blind,
and I've sacrificed a lot to set up my life in such a way that I can
accomplish things with very little to lose. So I might not be the
first person to ask when you have a large amount of expensive tools
(and I sincerely apologize if that's obnoxious, I get that). But I
think we can agree, nobody was inspired to create i3Detroit by the
question "What can we avoid today?"
Thank you for your tolerance of this message, which I hope is not too
offensive. Keep on being your awesome selves.
Matt, I like that you have addressed this. I've seen the safety issue crop
up many times as it should. However I think that far too often safety
concerns are overblown. When assessing risk for myself I usually start
with the baseline of, "How risky is my commute to Ferndale from my home in
Auburn Hills during rush hour traffic?". Most people don't even consider
their commute a risk but a little research on the topic will reveal that
every time you get in your car you are actually taking a potentially life
threatening risk. My point is of course that if something is less risky
than a drive in a car and we don't think of driving a car as risky, then we
shouldn't consider that project risky in terms of deciding whether to do it
or not. Too often I've seen projects halted due to a gross over assessment
of risk. Live dangerously, I say!
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Matt Arnold <matt.matt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Around the same time, there was a public service message with two guys
> in a basement smoking weed. One of them said "I've been smoking
> marijuana for years, and nothing happened to me." Then you hear
> offstage "John, did you even look for a job today?" He replies "Yeah,
> ma." Cue voiceover: "Do drugs... and NOTHING will happen to you, too."
> Setting aside the anti-pot alarmism of the ad, I think there are few
> worse epitaphs than "Nothing happened to him."
> There is an episode of "Mork & Mindy" in which Mork receives a visit
> from an insurance salesman. True to Mork's formula, the salesman has
> to explain insurance, leading to a list of all the dangers and risks
> in the world. When Mindy gets home, Mork has locked himself in a small
> cage, where he intends to remain indefinitely for his own protection.
> This happens from time to time on our mailing lists. The latest
> example is a discussion in which serious arguments are being made that
> our front door should not be transparent, even if it's bulletproof,
> because then it might exhibit our accomplishments, and if people have
> the opportunity to enjoy the awesomeness of i3Detroit facilities and
> creations, they might steal them. When bulletproofing makes someone
> feel insecure, you have to wonder where the insecurity really is, is
> all I'm saying. What are we afraid of? Ferndale? If so, we should not
> be there, maybe? The solution to not getting robbed is (A) try to be
> around people you trust, and (B) accept that you still might be
> robbed.
> No argument should ever consist solely of "it decreases security, so
> let's not do it." Being awesome always comes with a tradeoff in
> security, if you try hard enough to find it. Which part you notice
> more, the risk or the reward, is a personality thing. You've got to
> have both of those personality types in an organization's culture. But
> I would like to see more discussions of security measure the risk,
> measure the reward, and then weigh them against each other.
> Disclaimer: I freely admit I tend to be reward-focused and risk-blind,
> and I've sacrificed a lot to set up my life in such a way that I can
> accomplish things with very little to lose. So I might not be the
> first person to ask when you have a large amount of expensive tools
> (and I sincerely apologize if that's obnoxious, I get that). But I
> think we can agree, nobody was inspired to create i3Detroit by the
> question "What can we avoid today?"
> Thank you for your tolerance of this message, which I hope is not too
> offensive. Keep on being your awesome selves.
> -Eppcott
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
I have noticed that when it comes to security, there is no real solution.
Questions beget problems, problems beget discussions, discussions beget
questions, and the flow continues forever with no end in sight.
Besides, don't we leave a door mostly open (weather permitting) when the
space is open to guests? Last time I was there, the loading door was wide
open and out regular door was jammed open as well, allowing whomever to
come in and visit. Easy to case the joint, in that case.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Bob Bedard <zaft...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Matt, I like that you have addressed this. I've seen the safety issue
> crop up many times as it should. However I think that far too often safety
> concerns are overblown. When assessing risk for myself I usually start
> with the baseline of, "How risky is my commute to Ferndale from my home in
> Auburn Hills during rush hour traffic?". Most people don't even consider
> their commute a risk but a little research on the topic will reveal that
> every time you get in your car you are actually taking a potentially life
> threatening risk. My point is of course that if something is less risky
> than a drive in a car and we don't think of driving a car as risky, then we
> shouldn't consider that project risky in terms of deciding whether to do it
> or not. Too often I've seen projects halted due to a gross over assessment
> of risk. Live dangerously, I say!
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Matt Arnold <matt.matt...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> Around the same time, there was a public service message with two guys
>> in a basement smoking weed. One of them said "I've been smoking
>> marijuana for years, and nothing happened to me." Then you hear
>> offstage "John, did you even look for a job today?" He replies "Yeah,
>> ma." Cue voiceover: "Do drugs... and NOTHING will happen to you, too."
>> Setting aside the anti-pot alarmism of the ad, I think there are few
>> worse epitaphs than "Nothing happened to him."
>> There is an episode of "Mork & Mindy" in which Mork receives a visit
>> from an insurance salesman. True to Mork's formula, the salesman has
>> to explain insurance, leading to a list of all the dangers and risks
>> in the world. When Mindy gets home, Mork has locked himself in a small
>> cage, where he intends to remain indefinitely for his own protection.
>> This happens from time to time on our mailing lists. The latest
>> example is a discussion in which serious arguments are being made that
>> our front door should not be transparent, even if it's bulletproof,
>> because then it might exhibit our accomplishments, and if people have
>> the opportunity to enjoy the awesomeness of i3Detroit facilities and
>> creations, they might steal them. When bulletproofing makes someone
>> feel insecure, you have to wonder where the insecurity really is, is
>> all I'm saying. What are we afraid of? Ferndale? If so, we should not
>> be there, maybe? The solution to not getting robbed is (A) try to be
>> around people you trust, and (B) accept that you still might be
>> robbed.
>> No argument should ever consist solely of "it decreases security, so
>> let's not do it." Being awesome always comes with a tradeoff in
>> security, if you try hard enough to find it. Which part you notice
>> more, the risk or the reward, is a personality thing. You've got to
>> have both of those personality types in an organization's culture. But
>> I would like to see more discussions of security measure the risk,
>> measure the reward, and then weigh them against each other.
>> Disclaimer: I freely admit I tend to be reward-focused and risk-blind,
>> and I've sacrificed a lot to set up my life in such a way that I can
>> accomplish things with very little to lose. So I might not be the
>> first person to ask when you have a large amount of expensive tools
>> (and I sincerely apologize if that's obnoxious, I get that). But I
>> think we can agree, nobody was inspired to create i3Detroit by the
>> question "What can we avoid today?"
>> Thank you for your tolerance of this message, which I hope is not too
>> offensive. Keep on being your awesome selves.
>> -Eppcott
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
Doesn't our current door have a large window in it at average human height?
I'd be more concerned about the structure of the door preventing secure
operation of the maglock as well as the thermal implications than the
increased visibility. Am I missing something?
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jason Marshall <psion1...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I have noticed that when it comes to security, there is no real solution.
> Questions beget problems, problems beget discussions, discussions beget
> questions, and the flow continues forever with no end in sight.
> Besides, don't we leave a door mostly open (weather permitting) when the
> space is open to guests? Last time I was there, the loading door was wide
> open and out regular door was jammed open as well, allowing whomever to
> come in and visit. Easy to case the joint, in that case.
> Jason Marshall
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Bob Bedard <zaft...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Matt, I like that you have addressed this. I've seen the safety issue
>> crop up many times as it should. However I think that far too often safety
>> concerns are overblown. When assessing risk for myself I usually start
>> with the baseline of, "How risky is my commute to Ferndale from my home in
>> Auburn Hills during rush hour traffic?". Most people don't even consider
>> their commute a risk but a little research on the topic will reveal that
>> every time you get in your car you are actually taking a potentially life
>> threatening risk. My point is of course that if something is less risky
>> than a drive in a car and we don't think of driving a car as risky, then we
>> shouldn't consider that project risky in terms of deciding whether to do it
>> or not. Too often I've seen projects halted due to a gross over assessment
>> of risk. Live dangerously, I say!
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Matt Arnold <matt.matt...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Around the same time, there was a public service message with two guys
>>> in a basement smoking weed. One of them said "I've been smoking
>>> marijuana for years, and nothing happened to me." Then you hear
>>> offstage "John, did you even look for a job today?" He replies "Yeah,
>>> ma." Cue voiceover: "Do drugs... and NOTHING will happen to you, too."
>>> Setting aside the anti-pot alarmism of the ad, I think there are few
>>> worse epitaphs than "Nothing happened to him."
>>> There is an episode of "Mork & Mindy" in which Mork receives a visit
>>> from an insurance salesman. True to Mork's formula, the salesman has
>>> to explain insurance, leading to a list of all the dangers and risks
>>> in the world. When Mindy gets home, Mork has locked himself in a small
>>> cage, where he intends to remain indefinitely for his own protection.
>>> This happens from time to time on our mailing lists. The latest
>>> example is a discussion in which serious arguments are being made that
>>> our front door should not be transparent, even if it's bulletproof,
>>> because then it might exhibit our accomplishments, and if people have
>>> the opportunity to enjoy the awesomeness of i3Detroit facilities and
>>> creations, they might steal them. When bulletproofing makes someone
>>> feel insecure, you have to wonder where the insecurity really is, is
>>> all I'm saying. What are we afraid of? Ferndale? If so, we should not
>>> be there, maybe? The solution to not getting robbed is (A) try to be
>>> around people you trust, and (B) accept that you still might be
>>> robbed.
>>> No argument should ever consist solely of "it decreases security, so
>>> let's not do it." Being awesome always comes with a tradeoff in
>>> security, if you try hard enough to find it. Which part you notice
>>> more, the risk or the reward, is a personality thing. You've got to
>>> have both of those personality types in an organization's culture. But
>>> I would like to see more discussions of security measure the risk,
>>> measure the reward, and then weigh them against each other.
>>> Disclaimer: I freely admit I tend to be reward-focused and risk-blind,
>>> and I've sacrificed a lot to set up my life in such a way that I can
>>> accomplish things with very little to lose. So I might not be the
>>> first person to ask when you have a large amount of expensive tools
>>> (and I sincerely apologize if that's obnoxious, I get that). But I
>>> think we can agree, nobody was inspired to create i3Detroit by the
>>> question "What can we avoid today?"
>>> Thank you for your tolerance of this message, which I hope is not too
>>> offensive. Keep on being your awesome selves.
>>> -Eppcott
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
I have looked at replacing that door with a better setup (including crash
bar), but its on the order of $1500-2000
On May 29, 2012 11:38 AM, "Aaron Dubin" <aarondu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Doesn't our current door have a large window in it at average human
> height? I'd be more concerned about the structure of the door preventing
> secure operation of the maglock as well as the thermal implications than
> the increased visibility. Am I missing something?
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jason Marshall <psion1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> I have noticed that when it comes to security, there is no real solution.
>> Questions beget problems, problems beget discussions, discussions beget
>> questions, and the flow continues forever with no end in sight.
>> Besides, don't we leave a door mostly open (weather permitting) when the
>> space is open to guests? Last time I was there, the loading door was wide
>> open and out regular door was jammed open as well, allowing whomever to
>> come in and visit. Easy to case the joint, in that case.
>> Jason Marshall
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Bob Bedard <zaft...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Matt, I like that you have addressed this. I've seen the safety issue
>>> crop up many times as it should. However I think that far too often safety
>>> concerns are overblown. When assessing risk for myself I usually start
>>> with the baseline of, "How risky is my commute to Ferndale from my home in
>>> Auburn Hills during rush hour traffic?". Most people don't even consider
>>> their commute a risk but a little research on the topic will reveal that
>>> every time you get in your car you are actually taking a potentially life
>>> threatening risk. My point is of course that if something is less risky
>>> than a drive in a car and we don't think of driving a car as risky, then we
>>> shouldn't consider that project risky in terms of deciding whether to do it
>>> or not. Too often I've seen projects halted due to a gross over assessment
>>> of risk. Live dangerously, I say!
>>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Matt Arnold <matt.matt...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Around the same time, there was a public service message with two guys
>>>> in a basement smoking weed. One of them said "I've been smoking
>>>> marijuana for years, and nothing happened to me." Then you hear
>>>> offstage "John, did you even look for a job today?" He replies "Yeah,
>>>> ma." Cue voiceover: "Do drugs... and NOTHING will happen to you, too."
>>>> Setting aside the anti-pot alarmism of the ad, I think there are few
>>>> worse epitaphs than "Nothing happened to him."
>>>> There is an episode of "Mork & Mindy" in which Mork receives a visit
>>>> from an insurance salesman. True to Mork's formula, the salesman has
>>>> to explain insurance, leading to a list of all the dangers and risks
>>>> in the world. When Mindy gets home, Mork has locked himself in a small
>>>> cage, where he intends to remain indefinitely for his own protection.
>>>> This happens from time to time on our mailing lists. The latest
>>>> example is a discussion in which serious arguments are being made that
>>>> our front door should not be transparent, even if it's bulletproof,
>>>> because then it might exhibit our accomplishments, and if people have
>>>> the opportunity to enjoy the awesomeness of i3Detroit facilities and
>>>> creations, they might steal them. When bulletproofing makes someone
>>>> feel insecure, you have to wonder where the insecurity really is, is
>>>> all I'm saying. What are we afraid of? Ferndale? If so, we should not
>>>> be there, maybe? The solution to not getting robbed is (A) try to be
>>>> around people you trust, and (B) accept that you still might be
>>>> robbed.
>>>> No argument should ever consist solely of "it decreases security, so
>>>> let's not do it." Being awesome always comes with a tradeoff in
>>>> security, if you try hard enough to find it. Which part you notice
>>>> more, the risk or the reward, is a personality thing. You've got to
>>>> have both of those personality types in an organization's culture. But
>>>> I would like to see more discussions of security measure the risk,
>>>> measure the reward, and then weigh them against each other.
>>>> Disclaimer: I freely admit I tend to be reward-focused and risk-blind,
>>>> and I've sacrificed a lot to set up my life in such a way that I can
>>>> accomplish things with very little to lose. So I might not be the
>>>> first person to ask when you have a large amount of expensive tools
>>>> (and I sincerely apologize if that's obnoxious, I get that). But I
>>>> think we can agree, nobody was inspired to create i3Detroit by the
>>>> question "What can we avoid today?"
>>>> Thank you for your tolerance of this message, which I hope is not too
>>>> offensive. Keep on being your awesome selves.
>>>> -Eppcott
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
> Doesn't our current door have a large window in it at average human height?
> I'd be more concerned about the structure of the door preventing secure
> operation of the maglock as well as the thermal implications than the
> increased visibility. Am I missing something?
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jason Marshall
> <psion1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> I have noticed that when it comes to security, there is no real solution.
>> Questions beget problems, problems beget discussions, discussions beget
>> questions, and the flow continues forever with no end in sight.
>> Besides, don't we leave a door mostly open (weather permitting) when the
>> space is open to guests? Last time I was there, the loading door was
>> wide
>> open and out regular door was jammed open as well, allowing whomever to
>> come in and visit. Easy to case the joint, in that case.
>> Jason Marshall
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Bob Bedard <zaft...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Matt, I like that you have addressed this. I've seen the safety issue
>>> crop up many times as it should. However I think that far too often
>>> safety
>>> concerns are overblown. When assessing risk for myself I usually start
>>> with the baseline of, "How risky is my commute to Ferndale from my home
>>> in
>>> Auburn Hills during rush hour traffic?". Most people don't even
>>> consider
>>> their commute a risk but a little research on the topic will reveal that
>>> every time you get in your car you are actually taking a potentially
>>> life
>>> threatening risk. My point is of course that if something is less risky
>>> than a drive in a car and we don't think of driving a car as risky, then
>>> we
>>> shouldn't consider that project risky in terms of deciding whether to do
>>> it
>>> or not. Too often I've seen projects halted due to a gross over
>>> assessment
>>> of risk. Live dangerously, I say!
>>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Matt Arnold
>>> <matt.matt...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Around the same time, there was a public service message with two guys
>>>> in a basement smoking weed. One of them said "I've been smoking
>>>> marijuana for years, and nothing happened to me." Then you hear
>>>> offstage "John, did you even look for a job today?" He replies "Yeah,
>>>> ma." Cue voiceover: "Do drugs... and NOTHING will happen to you, too."
>>>> Setting aside the anti-pot alarmism of the ad, I think there are few
>>>> worse epitaphs than "Nothing happened to him."
>>>> There is an episode of "Mork & Mindy" in which Mork receives a visit
>>>> from an insurance salesman. True to Mork's formula, the salesman has
>>>> to explain insurance, leading to a list of all the dangers and risks
>>>> in the world. When Mindy gets home, Mork has locked himself in a small
>>>> cage, where he intends to remain indefinitely for his own protection.
>>>> This happens from time to time on our mailing lists. The latest
>>>> example is a discussion in which serious arguments are being made that
>>>> our front door should not be transparent, even if it's bulletproof,
>>>> because then it might exhibit our accomplishments, and if people have
>>>> the opportunity to enjoy the awesomeness of i3Detroit facilities and
>>>> creations, they might steal them. When bulletproofing makes someone
>>>> feel insecure, you have to wonder where the insecurity really is, is
>>>> all I'm saying. What are we afraid of? Ferndale? If so, we should not
>>>> be there, maybe? The solution to not getting robbed is (A) try to be
>>>> around people you trust, and (B) accept that you still might be
>>>> robbed.
>>>> No argument should ever consist solely of "it decreases security, so
>>>> let's not do it." Being awesome always comes with a tradeoff in
>>>> security, if you try hard enough to find it. Which part you notice
>>>> more, the risk or the reward, is a personality thing. You've got to
>>>> have both of those personality types in an organization's culture. But
>>>> I would like to see more discussions of security measure the risk,
>>>> measure the reward, and then weigh them against each other.
>>>> Disclaimer: I freely admit I tend to be reward-focused and risk-blind,
>>>> and I've sacrificed a lot to set up my life in such a way that I can
>>>> accomplish things with very little to lose. So I might not be the
>>>> first person to ask when you have a large amount of expensive tools
>>>> (and I sincerely apologize if that's obnoxious, I get that). But I
>>>> think we can agree, nobody was inspired to create i3Detroit by the
>>>> question "What can we avoid today?"
>>>> Thank you for your tolerance of this message, which I hope is not too
>>>> offensive. Keep on being your awesome selves.
>>>> -Eppcott
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups
>>> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "i3 Detroit Public" group.
> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
I'm not really sure who I'm responding to on this, although it was Matt's post that lit a fire under my butt to say something, but I've been following all this discussion with great interest, since I am 1) one of the most 'safety conscious' people in shop, having both been seriously hurt in industrial accidents, and been the witness of several that put the fear of God into me, and 2) am very well convinced that the weight of the burden of protecting oneself against harm must fall on the individual in jeopardy, that we can *no*t rely on the lawyers and their 'nanny-ocracy' that we find ourselves subject to these days. If we do, live life subject to the pissant bureaucratic rules imposed by the nanny's of this country I mean, then we may as well close down I3 and crawl under our beds, in the basement, permanently. As Matt paraphrases (from a rather chilling ad which caught my attention as well, putting aside, as I did, the anti pot-smoking alarmism implied) "nothing happened to him". And I have to agree with his conclusion, that 'there are few worse epitaphs than "Nothing happened to him".' I am completely opposed to the nanny-ocracy, because there are, in point of fact, 2 ways prison walls can work; to keep 'danger' out, or to keep guys like me (and I'm speaking of the general 'me' in this case) in, and under control. Both have some utility, one (however) I am deeply suspicious of having been kept 'under control' for many years now. And it make perfect sense that this should arise here, since we are, after all, a group of people who want to *DO* something;and to share our skills, knowledge and experience to encourage other people to *do* things as well, by whatever means are available, including sharing our tools our knowledge and our experience. Part of that experience tells me that risk aversion, that is to avoid any risk at all costs, is to be avoided because the cost we pay for that is to 'do nothing,' and that's too high a price to pay in my book, which is part of the reason I joined I3. So, I have to say a hearty hear hear to whoever wrote this heading in the first place, 'Watch Out, Or Nothing Will Happen To You'.
Note: or P.S. I had *just* finished writing the above, was about to post it, when the screen flickered and everything on it disappeared. I could only presume (since I have had a bunch of experience with computers) that this was an added 'security measure' by Google, or Firefox, my browser of choice. It was only through sheer luck that I happened to hit the right button to induce it to reappear (but not without much tearing out of hair). The nanny-ocracy strikes again. So, once again, hear hear, Matt.
On Tuesday, May 29, 2012 6:43:16 AM UTC-7, Matt Arnold wrote:
> Around the same time, there was a public service message with two guys > in a basement smoking weed. One of them said "I've been smoking > marijuana for years, and nothing happened to me." Then you hear > offstage "John, did you even look for a job today?" He replies "Yeah, > ma." Cue voiceover: "Do drugs... and NOTHING will happen to you, too." > Setting aside the anti-pot alarmism of the ad, I think there are few > worse epitaphs than "Nothing happened to him."
> There is an episode of "Mork & Mindy" in which Mork receives a visit > from an insurance salesman. True to Mork's formula, the salesman has > to explain insurance, leading to a list of all the dangers and risks > in the world. When Mindy gets home, Mork has locked himself in a small > cage, where he intends to remain indefinitely for his own protection.
> This happens from time to time on our mailing lists. The latest > example is a discussion in which serious arguments are being made that > our front door should not be transparent, even if it's bulletproof, > because then it might exhibit our accomplishments, and if people have > the opportunity to enjoy the awesomeness of i3Detroit facilities and > creations, they might steal them. When bulletproofing makes someone > feel insecure, you have to wonder where the insecurity really is, is > all I'm saying. What are we afraid of? Ferndale? If so, we should not > be there, maybe? The solution to not getting robbed is (A) try to be > around people you trust, and (B) accept that you still might be > robbed.
> No argument should ever consist solely of "it decreases security, so > let's not do it." Being awesome always comes with a tradeoff in > security, if you try hard enough to find it. Which part you notice > more, the risk or the reward, is a personality thing. You've got to > have both of those personality types in an organization's culture. But > I would like to see more discussions of security measure the risk, > measure the reward, and then weigh them against each other.
> Disclaimer: I freely admit I tend to be reward-focused and risk-blind, > and I've sacrificed a lot to set up my life in such a way that I can > accomplish things with very little to lose. So I might not be the > first person to ask when you have a large amount of expensive tools > (and I sincerely apologize if that's obnoxious, I get that). But I > think we can agree, nobody was inspired to create i3Detroit by the > question "What can we avoid today?"
> Thank you for your tolerance of this message, which I hope is not too > offensive. Keep on being your awesome selves.
