Deprecation of sleeping as a tolerated activity

[Mark Steward]

Hi all,

A lot of us are fed up with the nightly drama of trying to keep people
from sleeping in the space. It's been going on for too long, and most
people whose time allows them to be at the space at night have given
up trying to rouse irritable sleepers. There aren't enough webcams
for people outside the space to catch all the corners people nap in.

We want to stop people including sleeping at the space as a
possibility for their evening plans. The point at which you take your
shoes off, or settle sideways on the sofa at 2am, is the point at
which you should go home.

I therefore propose that we change rule 6 to make it clear that
sleeping is not acceptable under any circumstances. There may be
exceptions to this rule, but they should be agreed each time on the
mailing list, as with everything else in the space. So if it's
forecast to snow, bring a coat; if your trains stop at 1am, leave well
in advance; if you've been fixing the door entry system, get a car
home. Known offenders will be asked to leave before it gets too late
in the future.

Note that the intention here is to stop people *going* to sleep. If
people are already asleep, and you don't want to wake them up, let
them lie and drop a line to the list, IRC or directors in the morning.
Of course, nothing's stopping you waking/labelling/hacking them if
you like.

Suggestions/criticisms welcome.

Mark

[Benjamin Blundell]

Proactive, uniform response from all members is a good thing. +1  - Guess we all have a responsibility to make this work

Ben

--
-- 
(>) SECTION9 * Benjamin Blundell * Digital Creative * London & Manchester
(>) o...@section9.co.uk * www.section9.co.uk 
(>) www.twitter.com/secti0n9 * www.flickr.com/photos/section9

[Martin]

I don't really think a change in the rules is really going to help, we already have a rule there, and signs up and people ignore it.  I don't really feel a more strongly worded rule is going to do anything to change the situation.  Whats been happening recently is pretty unacceptable, and the rule as it stands makes that clear, we just need to change attitudes so that people actually know the rules and follow them as they currently stand

[Russ Garrett]

On 6 February 2012 11:14, Martin <crys...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I don't really think a change in the rules is really going to help, we
> already have a rule there, and signs up and people ignore it.  I don't
> really feel a more strongly worded rule is going to do anything to change
> the situation.  Whats been happening recently is pretty unacceptable, and
> the rule as it stands makes that clear, we just need to change attitudes so
> that people actually know the rules and follow them as they currently stand

When the wording of the current rule was adopted, it was accepted that
there were some cases where sleeping in the space was acceptable. It's
clear that this is no longer working, so we want to make it absolutely
clear that we're officially changing our position.

--
Russ Garrett
ru...@garrett.co.uk

[Jim MacArthur]

It's a "should not" at the moment; I'd like it to be a "must not". That would give me more confidence in asking people to wake up and keep hacking or go home.

Jim

On 6 February 2012 11:14, Martin <crys...@googlemail.com> wrote:

[Ximin Luo]

I missed any earlier discussions people might have had - what actually is the
problem with people going to sleep in the space? And who's been doing it?

--
GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
https://github.com/infinity0
https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
https://launchpad.net/~infinity0

[Russ Garrett]

On 6 February 2012 11:30, Ximin Luo <infi...@gmx.com> wrote:
> I missed any earlier discussions people might have had - what actually is the
> problem with people going to sleep in the space? And who's been doing it?

It's a slippery slope.

1) We don't possibly have enough space to allow everyone to sleep at the space.
2) If sleeping is tolerated, the space could become attractive to
homeless people.
3) Having people sleeping in the space puts members off from doing
things (even subconsciously).
4) It's quite unattractive for new members to come in and see people
sleeping everywhere.
5) It may be disallowed under the terms of our lease (it's not
specifically disallowed but there are terms which could be seen to
restrict it).

Naming names isn't productive, but over the last month we've had
probably between 10 and 20 different people sleeping in the space.

--
Russ Garrett
ru...@garrett.co.uk

[Martin]

Ok, after talking on IRC, i think it might be a good idea to change the rule, but we really need to enforce this if we do. People need to know not to sleep here (which i'm sure they already do ) and people need to be able to challenge sleepers and tell them to get up/ go home if needed.  a rule change may help, but its not gunna entirely solve the problem

[Ben Blundell]

Exactly my point. There needs to be a unified response from all members in order to enforce said rule.

B

[Will Green]

I reluctantly agree with Mark. Reluctantly, because I think banning is
a last resort. The current system isn't working so it's time to try
another approach. I would encourage everyone to wake and politely
reprimand any sleepers. Social pressure is one of the strongest
weapons we have.

I have three air horns on order, which are due to arrive Wednesday. I
hope they'll provide a deterrent in the (sadly likely) event the rule
change doesn't have the desired effect. To avoid a free-for-all, I
don't plan to make them publicly available. I should be in the space
in the mornings at least a couple of times a week for the foreseeable
future. If sleeping is occurring I will make restrained use of the
horns: there won't be any setting off of horns in people's ears. If
anyone objects to the air horn plan, please let me know.

I'd also like to see a few copies of the rules posted prominently in
the space. I'd be happy to do this once the rule change is agreed.

We mustn't let a few inconsiderate people spoil the space for the
majority. It's a great place.

W

[phil jones]

I'm amazed that no-one knows who the people sleeping are, and that
their friends / colleagues in the space aren't encouraging them not to
do it.

Is there really a group of members who aren't sufficiently hooked into
the rest of the informal social network of the space that they don't
know that this conversation is going on and aren't willing to explain
themselves or discuss it, especially if they disagree with a sleeping
prohibition.

Phil

[tom]

> I'd also like to see a few copies of the rules posted prominently in
> the space. I'd be happy to do this once the rule change is agreed.
>

we tried putting up an informational leaflet about where to sleep
outside the space, only for it to be torn down.

I'll happily automate the airhorn if you like?

On Feb 6, 4:38 pm, Will Green <in...@flux.org.uk> wrote:
> I reluctantly agree with Mark. Reluctantly, because I think banning is
> a last resort. The current system isn't working so it's time to try
> another approach. I would encourage everyone to wake and politely
> reprimand any sleepers. Social pressure is one of the strongest
> weapons we have.
>
> I have three air horns on order, which are due to arrive Wednesday. I
> hope they'll provide a deterrent in the (sadly likely) event the rule
> change doesn't have the desired effect. To avoid a free-for-all, I
> don't plan to make them publicly available. I should be in the space
> in the mornings at least a couple of times a week for the foreseeable
> future. If sleeping is occurring I will make restrained use of the
> horns: there won't be any setting off of horns in people's ears. If
> anyone objects to the air horn plan, please let me know.
>
> I'd also like to see a few copies of the rules posted prominently in
> the space. I'd be happy to do this once the rule change is agreed.
>
> We mustn't let a few inconsiderate people spoil the space for the
> majority. It's a great place.
>
> W
>
> On 6 February 2012 13:06, Ben Blundell <o...@benjaminblundell.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Exactly my point. There needs to be a unified response from all members in
> > order to enforce said rule.
>
> > B
>

> > On 6 February 2012 11:45, Martin <crysi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Ok, after talking on IRC, i think it might be a good idea to change the
> >> rule, but we really need to enforce this if we do. People need to know not
> >> to sleep here (which i'm sure they already do ) and people need to be able
> >> to challenge sleepers and tell them to get up/ go home if needed.  a rule
> >> change may help, but its not gunna entirely solve the problem
>

> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Russ Garrett <r...@garrett.co.uk> wrote:

>
> >>> On 6 February 2012 11:30, Ximin Luo <infini...@gmx.com> wrote:
> >>> > I missed any earlier discussions people might have had - what actually
> >>> > is the
> >>> > problem with people going to sleep in the space? And who's been doing
> >>> > it?
>
> >>> It's a slippery slope.
>
> >>> 1) We don't possibly have enough space to allow everyone to sleep at the
> >>> space.
> >>> 2) If sleeping is tolerated, the space could become attractive to
> >>> homeless people.
> >>> 3) Having people sleeping in the space puts members off from doing
> >>> things (even subconsciously).
> >>> 4) It's quite unattractive for new members to come in and see people
> >>> sleeping everywhere.
> >>> 5) It may be disallowed under the terms of our lease (it's not
> >>> specifically disallowed but there are terms which could be seen to
> >>> restrict it).
>
> >>> Naming names isn't productive, but over the last month we've had
> >>> probably between 10 and 20 different people sleeping in the space.
>
> >>> --
> >>> Russ Garrett

> >>> r...@garrett.co.uk

[benjamin winston]

Can we have a verbal warning of the airhorn first? Just so I don't cut off my hand or anything.

b

[Mark Steward]

We know who they are, but they tend to make friends with other
sleepers. It's the grouping together, especially with the cold
weather, that has made it intimidating for members trying to actually
use the space.

I strongly dislike prohibition, because I think people ought to be
responsible and aware enough to not abuse it. But we've seen over the
last few weeks that that isn't the case, and I'm not sure what other
options there are.

Mark

[Will Green]

Of course. I will warn anyone else in the space before using an air horn.

This is why I don't think air horns should be remote activated and why
I won't be leaving them in the space. The cure has the potential to be
worse than the disease (hello cane toads).

[Sam Kelly]

In the absence of Will and/or air horns, I suggest setting off an
alarm clock (or a phone app) and handing them a very pointed mug of
coffee.

--
Sam Kelly, http://www.eithin.co.uk/

That's it.  We're not messing around anymore, we're buying a bigger
dictionary.  -  Tibor Fischer, The Thought Gang.

[Matte]

are you suggesting huge, genetically modified Cane Toads trained to eat sleepers? That's a little drastic but I'd buy it....

Matt

www.matthearn.co.uk

[tom]

i'm working on getting glados to say cute things when its dark
(think : "it is dark, you are likely to be eaten by a grue" and "Help
me! I think I'm going blind"), it might help but if not at least it'll
be cool :)

On Feb 6, 5:28 pm, Sam Kelly <s...@eithin.co.uk> wrote:
> In the absence of Will and/or air horns, I suggest setting off an
> alarm clock (or a phone app) and handing them a very pointed mug of
> coffee.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Will Green <in...@flux.org.uk> wrote:
> > Of course. I will warn anyone else in the space before using an air horn.
>
> > This is why I don't think air horns should be remote activated and why
> > I won't be leaving them in the space. The cure has the potential to be
> > worse than the disease (hello cane toads).
>

> >>> > On 6 February 2012 11:45, Martin <crysi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> >> Ok, after talking on IRC, i think it might be a good idea to change the
> >>> >> rule, but we really need to enforce this if we do. People need to know
> >>> >> not
> >>> >> to sleep here (which i'm sure they already do ) and people need to be
> >>> >> able
> >>> >> to challenge sleepers and tell them to get up/ go home if needed.  a
> >>> >> rule
> >>> >> change may help, but its not gunna entirely solve the problem
>

> >>> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Russ Garrett <r...@garrett.co.uk>
> >>> >> wrote:

>
> >>> >>> On 6 February 2012 11:30, Ximin Luo <infini...@gmx.com> wrote:
> >>> >>> > I missed any earlier discussions people might have had - what
> >>> >>> > actually
> >>> >>> > is the
> >>> >>> > problem with people going to sleep in the space? And who's been
> >>> >>> > doing
> >>> >>> > it?
>
> >>> >>> It's a slippery slope.
>
> >>> >>> 1) We don't possibly have enough space to allow everyone to sleep at
> >>> >>> the
> >>> >>> space.
> >>> >>> 2) If sleeping is tolerated, the space could become attractive to
> >>> >>> homeless people.
> >>> >>> 3) Having people sleeping in the space puts members off from doing
> >>> >>> things (even subconsciously).
> >>> >>> 4) It's quite unattractive for new members to come in and see people
> >>> >>> sleeping everywhere.
> >>> >>> 5) It may be disallowed under the terms of our lease (it's not
> >>> >>> specifically disallowed but there are terms which could be seen to
> >>> >>> restrict it).
>
> >>> >>> Naming names isn't productive, but over the last month we've had
> >>> >>> probably between 10 and 20 different people sleeping in the space.
>
> >>> >>> --
> >>> >>> Russ Garrett

> >>> >>> r...@garrett.co.uk

>
> >>> > --
> >>> > --
> >>> > (>) SECTION9 * Benjamin Blundell * Digital Creative * London &
> >>> > Manchester
> >>> > (>) o...@section9.co.uk * www.section9.co.uk
> >>> > (>)www.twitter.com/secti0n9*www.flickr.com/photos/section9
>
> --

> Sam Kelly,http://www.eithin.co.uk/

[Sam Kelly]

It will indeed! I suggest singing creepy little lullabies from time to
time, too. (Partner has volunteered their vocal talents for this
purpose, if useful.)

Hush little hacker, nice and snug
You're about to be eaten by a bug
Long and squirmy-slimy, made of plastic and steel
But don't you worry little hacker, you won't feel
A thiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnggggg.

--
Sam Kelly, http://www.eithin.co.uk/

[scary boots]

+1

[Paddy Duncan]

Nobody knows? I do...

[Paddy Duncan]

Just saw this - spot on...

-----Original Message-----
From: london-h...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:london-h...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark Steward
Sent: 06 February 2012 17:04
To: london-h...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [london-hack-space] Deprecation of sleeping as a tolerated
activity

[Nin Lil'izi]

Can I request if you set any of those off.
You warn everybody else in the space first.

Some of us have medical conditions where the shock of such a thing going off nearby is going to be a big problem.

Regards,
Nin lil'izi

Skype: Nin-lil-izi
Help me stay fed, order a certain and enevitable demise off me today!
GPG Fingerprint: C510 909B 811E D6F5 0DFF 5D91 CF03 8FEA FD69 4622

[Bernard Tyers]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 6 Feb 2012, at 17:03, Mark Steward wrote:

> I strongly dislike prohibition, because I think people ought to be
> responsible and aware enough to not abuse it. But we've seen over the
> last few weeks that that isn't the case, and I'm not sure what other
> options there are.

I unfortunately agree. It's a pity some people act like that, but thats the problem when you involve humans in anything...they seem to start acting for themselves!

It is good that rules are kept to a minimum.

I'd still like the "waving the studded baseball bat approach menacingly" and see what happens. Deterrant as opposed to prohibition.

Not wanting to further the discussion, but how do other hackspaces deal with the behaviour? Or is it only a London thing?

=====
Bernard / bluboxthief / ei8fdb
IO91XM / www.ei8fdb.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPMDXOAAoJENsz1IO7MIrrcpYH/A25NwtoxAlNRkr8dizeB+C/
OzaynD9pOw3IuZnjyBYgdWcjQWGcR6P1z4FawpAi1lE6qoWJhtmfmU5jiRUONq3/
iEb2aX1ENyUcRaXXssfde+uqEXjG7Dz3jtAuF90hySb8FjU0ame4vYkDEPkCgcPM
2IeBmeKJGfpq5wQ5/xX2AOMMeY58fl2OmqEBQ6wWIS0YpoGg0iFJXx1NuH6byJqR
OoNoWR2ljdcCGKvt3XqnohV0GfaFRFKLzvqPsigMMH3Ow3+xdT3Jmd0dd6g0fdlD
G9nXhAG+fbkKCpFX5VJZtPwNCW3RQMwZy1fIQELemo6I/ctldVp/cCILgE5VCcE=
=ok+1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Adrian Godwin]

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Bernard Tyers <ei8...@ei8fdb.org> wrote:
>
> Not wanting to further the discussion, but how do other hackspaces deal with the behaviour? Or is it only a London thing?
>
>

No, noisebridge went through the same process.

-adrian

[Bernard Tyers]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

And the outcome was the same?

=====
Bernard / bluboxthief / ei8fdb
IO91XM / www.ei8fdb.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPMDozAAoJENsz1IO7MIrrzL8H/0YpKNQTnUKW6dOQU/qjeRSH
XZ/omOU5uDxi+W+DNfeUg6J9Bt02bkMTDpB4sHPW1Sb0mYZpXr+P9/Q7o0eAHCkV
Jy818Ahqm6hyeqxLUQoZKLo/dFKW3CoyieY3NKz0PeoraqyZ46jr9He5++ZMUZAS
qDWQFCAiUR1zA565DAmIGiM+fHK5Tx8GOOzCgcsIZ/2/3uoFhG8jUCfViIFmXdHP
HOqbIXV9M7AHhgRFgYq85rS2aWaXXfAs4JTHSmxIFbR606xtWhmkZa7Lb1K3qSbi
cIuNVgTQzkev+RPn3j15S7QHMh8BqWhrH6PgxEWlh/idZEaF7wwRMvyTIlHUyh4=
=+5Te
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Adrian Godwin]

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Bernard Tyers <ei8...@ei8fdb.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> On 6 Feb 2012, at 20:30, Adrian Godwin wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Bernard Tyers <ei8...@ei8fdb.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not wanting to further the discussion, but how do other hackspaces deal with the behaviour? Or is it only a London thing?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No, noisebridge went through the same process.
>
>
> And the outcome was the same?
>

yeah, afaicr everyone had to get really strict until the new pattern was set.

-adrian

[Russ Garrett]

On 6 February 2012 20:19, Bernard Tyers <ei8...@ei8fdb.org> wrote:
> Not wanting to further the discussion, but how do other hackspaces deal with the behaviour? Or is it only a London thing?

You think we've got drama? There are probably 200-300 messages in
these three threads alone:

https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2010-October/017152.html
https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2011-January/020270.html
https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2011-October/025409.html

And here's their wiki page on sleeping (which has coincidentally just
been updated):
https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Sleeping

--
Russ Garrett
ru...@garrett.co.uk

[Bernard Tyers]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Excellent! All transferred to my Kindle for some late night...bed reading.

I have to say I do like the look of this:

https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Sleeping#Noisebridge_is_not_your_home.2C_it_is_your_hackspace

"If you fail to wake up and hack or leave when asked, you should expect to have your behavior discussed at a community meeting, and you are likely to end up being unwelcome here.

People who sleep at Noisebridge may find themselves awakened by the Rooster Brigade.

If you'd like to talk about the issue of sleeping, please join Noisebridge's discuss list at: https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss"

https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Rooster_Brigade

"The Rooster Brigade is an observational effort to understand the nocturnal underbelly of the Noisebridge community and hopefully disseminate excellence beyond the midnight hour.
The Rooster Brigade maintains no official policy on how to wake or interact with people who are sleeping at Noisebridge."

Along with the rooster log.

=====
Bernard / bluboxthief / ei8fdb
IO91XM / www.ei8fdb.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPMEGRAAoJENsz1IO7MIrrZzoH/Aqn7gOCWHXK3FZ+Ic1x3itx
1D6vVP3uk8byVBdqubrXHcDsNsOZuRAt5G1k5KAB0Jx88GPjO0L9ES92WKqiuO5r
WQKylsDI0aVTqHy1ZTHA5cgy8Jgx5ev2yJ7RODLUE2IMmqlbxL4JB+dfgzUkEiYc
ipJ0WgxRZ2TjZa8WWo8/EtfXgdFXsyhX6Sse2Bmriq8jkGS8s3wxJUqrLLaMy8jd
4IN/xGBRLyaXESoQ01yqYSXWLHqccTPqx/Z+VJKON5rKIx9oott+BEBPMMVXqyzE
F5ElZcK7DzNyRpJII8ez2htRzC14xvMp3gWwqYCYd3ThUUouHcD9vW0P7Ennhpc=
=uCqR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Martin Dittus]

As has been said before, people are welcome to look at technical measures to resolve this for their own enjoyment, as long as they don't affect people's safety; but we are unlikely to rely on them as a resolution. Applying social pressure appears much more promising than relying on a growing battery of toys.

I like the idea of a public list of shame, along with other graduated reprimands. (Reducing one's privacy as a cost of transgressions seems like a fair step to me.)

m.

[Yuan Gao]

I may have an interesting technical deterrent.  I modified a clock some time ago to tick irregularly (it's microcontroller-controlled now, so you can have it tick however you want).

Some people can't sleep with any ticking clock in the room at all, while others can.  I am one of those who can, but the couple of times I tried to sleep with this irregularly ticking clock in my room, I spent most of the night in a shallow, fitful and uneasy sleep, waking up randomly throughout the night for no apparent reason (I suspect though probably whenever the clock made a particularly long pause between ticks).  Both times I woke up the next day feeling terrible.

You'll hardly notice the irregular ticking by day, and of course since it's microcontroller-controlled, you can simply program it to tick regularly during the day and only begin the subtle psychological torture at certain night-time hours.

I can donate the clock to the space, the microcontroller doesn't last too long on batteries, so you would be better off powering it by its mini-USB port (either from a computer, or a mains-mini-USB adaptor).

[benjamin winston]

And again, with feeling (and without breaking the geneva conventions, dr.)!!!

I agree with social pressure. I you see someone sleeping, calmly wake them up and explain that they can't sleep here

b

b

[tom]

> I agree with social pressure. I you see someone sleeping, calmly wake them
> up and explain that they can't sleep here

we tried this, a bunch of other people in the space at the time
objected and the lose^H^H^H^Hsleeper didnt get woken up


On Feb 7, 9:37 am, benjamin winston <benjamin.wins...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[Sam Cook]

I think part of it is that often people don't feel comfortable waking up others (especially if they don't know them)

That being said I don't mind people sleeping at the space *shrug*

S

[Sci]

On 06/02/2012 22:43, Martin Dittus wrote:
> As has been said before, people are welcome to look at technical measures to resolve this for their own enjoyment, as long as they don't affect people's safety; but we are unlikely to rely on them as a resolution. Applying social pressure appears much more promising than relying on a growing battery of toys.
>
> I like the idea of a public list of shame, along with other graduated reprimands. (Reducing one's privacy as a cost of transgressions seems like a fair step to me.)
>
> m.

A public list of shame tends to look petty and largely burns any bridges
toward reforming their behaviour. Afterall who wants to stay in an
environment where bad judgements will hang over their heads forever?
If we're going down that route it's simpler and less painful to just ban
them outright.

I'd say if you catch someone sleeping (as opposed to passed out on their
breadboards) and don't feel you have the authority to deal with it, then
email the admins. Admins should have a quiet word, that word being the
single warning; stop it or be banned. And follow through with that
warning with no exceptions.

[Sci]

Perhaps we need to take that further. Try for some basic AI with an
obsession over Scie.. Hacking. Put the sleepers to good use, especially
since they already happen to be in the Biohacking room. That's
practically permission!
I still think we could re-purpose the monorail concept into a system of
semi-autonomous ceiling-rail-mount cameras and robot arms.

[Mike]

On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 11:42:10AM +0000, Russ Garrett wrote:
> On 6 February 2012 11:30, Ximin Luo <infi...@gmx.com> wrote:
> > I missed any earlier discussions people might have had - what actually is the
> > problem with people going to sleep in the space? And who's been doing it?
>
> It's a slippery slope.
>
> 1) We don't possibly have enough space to allow everyone to sleep at the space.
> 2) If sleeping is tolerated, the space could become attractive to
> homeless people.
> 3) Having people sleeping in the space puts members off from doing
> things (even subconsciously).
> 4) It's quite unattractive for new members to come in and see people
> sleeping everywhere.
> 5) It may be disallowed under the terms of our lease (it's not
> specifically disallowed but there are terms which could be seen to
> restrict it).

6) When we become a residential facility, our fire safety requirements
become a whole new world of pain.

7) The place starts to smell of old hackers

8) The next logical step from sleeping is waking up and having a shower,
leaving your towel somewhere, toothbrushes in the bathroom, needing a
bigger kitchen, let's get a TV to watch. This is a HackSpace not the
fucking Big Brother house.

> Naming names isn't productive, but over the last month we've had
> probably between 10 and 20 different people sleeping in the space.
>

I believe the rules say sleeping should only be done in "exceptional
circumstances". I find it hard to believe that there have been 10-20
exceptional circumstances this month.

Mike.

[Paul Dart]

On 7 February 2012 11:41, Mike <hack...@norgie.net> wrote:
> I believe the rules say sleeping should only be done in "exceptional
> circumstances".  I find it hard to believe that there have been 10-20
> exceptional circumstances this month.

You have to be a bit careful with things like that. Assume it was 20
different people. With 400 members now, that works out as an
'exceptional circumstance' once per 20months per person (assuming
completely even distribution blah blah statistics general get out
clauses).

I think with my visits to the space once every couple of years there
might well be an occasion where something goes wrong for some
reason... How often is exceptional? :)

Hackspace is now big enough that this issue (amongst others) is a problem.

I'm already regretting typing this as I'm sure it will lead onto even
more discussion.

Paul

[Martin Dittus]

Yeah, after talking to a few people I ended up surprised by the number of individuals that ended up in this situation in the last few weeks. It's more than a handful.

[t...@christwithfries.net]

The problem with an "exceptional circumstances" clause is that who
defines exceptional? IIRC one of the current sleepers is actually
homeless due to the BOI eviction - is that exceptional circumstances or
not? Some people will say yes, others will say it's part and parcel of
taking part in that kind of activity and there are plenty of homeless
shelters in London. I think it just needs to be a blanket ban unless the
four horsemen are laying siege to Cremer St or public transport grinds
to a halt for no apparent reason (we all knew it was going to snow last
weekend!)

[Mark Steward]

Exactly - this is why we've been reluctant to propose an outright ban.
We've always targeted repeat offenders, but during cold weeks there
are now enough of them to outnumber the people telling them not to
sleep. On recent nights the space has only been open (and consuming
electricity) for people who are waiting to crash out.

We've hit a limit of scale, and I think the only way to resolve this
is a shift in culture.

Mark

[Martin]

++ (not +1 cus i hate that crap and everyone knows ++ is the correct way to increment a counter so screw u google) I hate having absolute rules like this, but it seems like theres really no other option.  As sci says though we really should get a procedure for dealing with offenders, quiet word being first instance, and if people don't feel like they have the balls to wake people up, an anonymous fog horn activated from either irc or irl by private message to robonaut, so that people who really wanna wake people up anonymously should be able to

[Monty]

http://i.imgur.com/pt2fb.png

[tom]

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lu9x534RPR1r4likeo1_500.jpg
surely?


On Feb 7, 2:44 pm, Monty <monty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://i.imgur.com/pt2fb.png

[Nigel Worsley]

> http://i.imgur.com/pt2fb.png

I prefer this http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8387129/BB.pdf

Nigle

[danny staple]

Aren't you guys forgetting the cockroaches? Apparently, if they are desperate, they will crawl over to get salt or moisture from sleeping peoples eyelids, mouths and noses.

--
Danny Staple

Director, ODM Solutions Ltd
w: http://www.odmsolutions.co.uk
Blog: http://orionrobots.co.uk/blog1-Danny-Staple

[Nigel Worsley]

I have just updated this too http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8387129/Sleepban.pdf

Nigle

[Richard Fine]

On 2/7/2012 11:14 AM, Sci wrote:
> A public list of shame tends to look petty and largely burns any bridges
> toward reforming their behaviour. Afterall who wants to stay in an
> environment where bad judgements will hang over their heads forever?

Couldn't it just be a rolling list? Like, if you haven't been caught
sleeping in the space for 60 days, your name is taken off the list
again. Or the longer it's been since you were caught, the lower down on
the list you are, so there's less shame. Etc.

That said, I think the rule change to ban it is a much, much better
idea. It's not like it makes sleeping in the space physically impossible
or anything; it'd still be possible to grant exemptions. It just means
that judging the cases where sleeping is acceptable would have to be
done by the group / the management, rather than by individual members
(who are apparently getting it wrong way too often).

(Pretty sure this is a pattern of some sort: use the simplest,
least-open-to-interpretation, least-open-to-discretion policy possible
for individual members reasoning on their own, and then provide a
mechanism to override the policy when members are reasoning en masse).

- Richard

[Amran]

nigle - am i ok borrow that for use in another space?

[Nigel Worsley]

> nigle - am i ok borrow that for use in another space?

Yes, consider it public domain.

Nigle

[Martin Dittus]

May also be worth putting on our wiki, to make sure it won't get lost.

m.

[Russ Garrett]

Just an update that, since there have been no objections to this
policy, I have now updated the rules accordingly:

http://wiki.london.hackspace.org.uk/view/Rules

I also added a small section clarifying that trustees have the right
to strip people of membership and ban them as a last resort. Please,
please, don't make us do that :(.

--
Russ Garrett
ru...@garrett.co.uk

[Aden]

I object to the "of membership" in that last rule

[Martin]

Yes, I think its also unfair that only trustees should have the right to strip, or to strip others in the space, I think we need clear rules on when stripping is justified

[Sam Cook]

stripping is always justified, in fact I'm stripping right now

[guyfa...@myway.com]

I have slept in the space once in the last six months, last october.

I am annoyed that a minority of inconsiderate people mean I can't
have a nap for an hour at 4AM.
I have been paying 50 quid a month, I no longer wish to subsidise
a load of inconsiderate five-pound-a-month members who
constantly make the space filthy and untidy and break the tools.
I have adjusted my standing order accordingly.

If anyone starts a new hackspace with a no freeloading slobs policy
you will have my full support

Grrrrrr

[Nigel Worsley]

> If anyone starts a new hackspace with a no freeloading slobs policy
> you will have my full support

Which part of London are you in?

Nigle

[guyfa...@myway.com]

> Which part of London are you in?
>
> Nigle

Relatively far out south east in the London Borough of Bromley.

[Mark Steward]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:41 PM, guyfa...@myway.com
<guyfa...@myway.com> wrote:
> If anyone starts a new hackspace with a no freeloading slobs policy
> you will have my full support
>

For what it's worth, this is our policy.

http://wiki.london.hackspace.org.uk/view/Rules

Rules 6-8 and 13-17 are prohibitions against the slobbery we see most
frequently, but it's hard to enforce such things from the top down.
We've doubled in size from 200 subscribers in the last year, so over
half the members have less than a year's experience of how to look
after the space. I think we need more people with experience and
knowledge of the space to come regularly and pass on the ethos:
complaints on the list are only heard by other people on the list.

> Grrrrrr
>

Agreed.

[tom]

I hink we need an official welcome process/pack thing. While its cool
we just drag people round and point at stuff it might be a good way to
emphasise important ground rules

On Feb 10, 3:15 pm, Mark Steward <markstew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:41 PM, guyfawk...@myway.com

[Toby Catlin]

+1

[James Heaver]

If we want a printed pack then I will have a magazine style printer
and staple binder (should be up and running on the 20th) and am happy
to donate some printer time.

Might be useful to have a stack of tour books which can be used as
prompts when someone gives the tour and that the new member can take
away with them.

Could also include rules, guides, advice, horoscopes and a copy of pi,
chi squared lookup tables etc or whatever else might be useful
perhaps.

On 10 February 2012 15:30, tom <bollo...@gmail.com> wrote:

[danny staple]

Bear in mind it is not necessarily newer members or rare visitors that take the pee here. I've been a member for about a year, I've only actually made it to the space 2 or 3 times - and I did clear my crap up afterwards as I generally think its just a reasonable thing to do. I've been on the list and IRC (less so than the mailing list) more than I've been able to find time to haul myself over to Hoxton. That there are people there regularly who bother with neither and slob out just shows a lack of respect. As guyfawkes put it - freeloaders.

[Monty]

A reminder of the project Amran started:
http://wiki.london.hackspace.org.uk/view/Project:100_Paper_Cuts

On Feb 10, 3:47 pm, James Heaver <ja...@heaver.org> wrote:
> If we want a printed pack then I will have a magazine style printer
> and staple binder (should be up and running on the 20th) and am happy
> to donate some printer time.
>
> Might be useful to have a stack of tour books which can be used as
> prompts when someone gives the tour and that the new member can take
> away with them.
>
> Could also include rules, guides, advice, horoscopes and a copy of pi,
> chi squared lookup tables etc or whatever else might be useful
> perhaps.
>

[James Broadhead]

On 10 February 2012 15:47, James Heaver <ja...@heaver.org> wrote:
> If we want a printed pack then I will have a magazine style printer
> and staple binder (should be up and running on the 20th) and am happy
> to donate some printer time.
>
> Might be useful to have a stack of tour books which can be used as
> prompts when someone gives the tour and that the new member can take
> away with them.
>
> Could also include rules, guides, advice, horoscopes and a copy of pi,
> chi squared lookup tables etc or whatever else might be useful
> perhaps.

It could be a pdf, and not on dead tree.

[Dave Ingram]

Yes, as well, but I'd argue that dead tree is handier for getting people
to read it then and there.

D

[Toby Catlin]

I like the idea of an agreement to abide by our rules and ideology being included in such a pack. This would be signed by the member and held in the hackspace. It wouldn't be legally binding but serves a cast iron indication that the member has read and understood the rules. Also psychologically it cements the ideas in ones head. 

t

[Russ Garrett]

I'm working on a welcome email which will get sent to members when
they subscribe to let them know of the rules. I also have a pending
release of the site which highlights the rules a bit more on the
membership site.

I don't see any reason to bring paper into it ;).

Russ

--
Russ Garrett
ru...@garrett.co.uk

[James Broadhead]

On 10 February 2012 17:13, Russ Garrett <ru...@garrett.co.uk> wrote:
> I'm working on a welcome email which will get sent to members when
> they subscribe to let them know of the rules. I also have a pending
> release of the site which highlights the rules a bit more on the
> membership site.
>
> I don't see any reason to bring paper into it ;).
>
> Russ
>

That's also a much more friendly approach.

I'm not sure quite how well a signed document full of small(ish) print
fits in with the hacker mentality.

[Kal]

+1

[Richard Fine]

On 2/10/2012 6:15 PM, James Broadhead wrote:
> I'm not sure quite how well a signed document full of small(ish) print
> fits in with the hacker mentality.

Spending time finding lots of little loopholes, omissions, unclear
specifications, and general exploits in such a document fits the
mentality very well :-)

- Richard