--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Looks mostly good! If any of this was covered during in-person discussion, please forgive. I'm in Louisiana and was unable to attend. I've added these as comments on the google doc, too. Some of the comments there are slightly more terse than here.
Comment/question: Does the code of condutct exist yet? I didn't see it on github. If not, how is it being created? I kind of feel that it is important to know what the code of conduct entails before voting on agreeing to follow it. Also, should we consider leaving the code of conduct in a more malleable form than a bylaws addendum which is subject to quorum, etc.? Might be nice to be able to amend it via a simple Vote of Membership. Thoughts?Comment/question: has the language for disputes been looked over by a real attorney? If not, I think it is worth spending a small amount of money to get a professional critique. My cousin is a business attorney and I could probably get her to look if I asked nicely. If she did not have time, I have had great experiences with a local law firm which drafted all the liability releases I used for my business but this would not be free.Comment/Question: There have been cases where (rightly or not) Leadership of the Corporation have been accused of showing favoritism or being unfair. Why "Probationary Members may be expelled by a vote of at least one third of the Leadership" ? This strikes me as a little prejudicial. I feel like new members should be given the benefit of the doubt, especially considering how few people would need to get together to gang up on someone with a third being the threshold. Why not majority with a tie being affirmative?
Comment: Vote 9 re: access to the mailing list. Since the beginning of the hive, the primary mailing list "cincihackerspace@googlegroups.com" has been an open, public list. I strongly feel that transparency is a goal the Hive should strive for. Having a public mailing list serves the goal of transparency. Why does Vote 9 exist? Access to the mailing list is available to the general public. Why does it need to be part of the membership addendum? Can someone in favor of this explain what the goal is because I don't get it.
Comment: Suspension procedure. I think the heading on section 2 needs to be more descriptive. I think this really should read: "Then the Leadership of the Corporation meets in order to vote on what to do." 1. You've defined "Leadership of the Corporation" - USE IT. 2. While it is IMPLIED that Leadership would need to meet in order to vote, being explicit about it here is more clearComment: Suspension procedure. I really do not like "2e. The meeting may be closed. Leadership may request the presence of anyone connected to the issue." Closed meetings are anti-transparency. I'm going to guess that the idea here would be to allow Leadership to discuss and make decisions without being hampered or distracted by members not a part of the leadership attending a suspension meeting. I really don't like the idea of outright closed meetings - I think this is counter how the space should operate. Alternatively, I would wholeheartedly support instead "Leadership may ask anyone present at a suspension meeting to leave in the event that they were being disruptive or interfering with proceedings." I think this gives Leadership the explicit right to remove people getting in the way of accomplishing goals while allowing interested parties to be involved as long as they do so in a constructive, respectful manner.thanks,
-D--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
I edited Vote 9 (Mailing List as a Right). It had originally been numbered and written to flow with a slightly outdated copy of the Membership Addendum. I also explained in the summary that this doesn't mean non-Members are no longer allowed access to the list.
I think that every other comment I've addressed as a reply to the comment on the document.
--
Ian, Excellent wording.
This was brought up with a previous issue we had between two members, but the Hive could not afford to get into a legal tiff, I think at the time the subject was over a gender discrimination claim. We don't want a poorly written bylaws to also hurt us.
My concerns with the sections (Some may have been brought up already):
Vote 1: Where do we have official Corporation records?
Vote 2: Adding a section for Code of Conduct addendum with no Code of Conduct is a poor decision. This should not be added without the Addendum to go with it.
Vote 3: These are bylaws of the company, not a contract.They are two majorly different things. The Summary says any Dispute, this would only hold true for the Company and who the contract holds to, not two individual separate members.
Vote 4: Partnership Membership & Family memberships both need a lot clearer definition.
A family membership for example can easily cover 10 people if they are polyamorous. (Person A is in a relationship with Person B, & Person C. Person B is in a Relationship with D & E Person C is in a relationship with F & G, then to define D-G's relationship. These would all fall under immediate family for significant others, therefor immediate family.
A Partnership can be any two friends currently. This would potentially drop our funding in half.
Vote 5 & 6: Both are poorly written. (I do like adding a way to vote out an officer or Board.)
Vote 8: we need 1/3rd vote of leadership for a probationary member? I don't agree with this. For one, this as a company policy as a whole can easily be abused, for easy profits, an easy fix for that is to refund the membership if leadership decides to do this.
Vote 9: Now this one is a nightmare. The mailing list is public, has always been, how would that change anything? Short Term suspensions can be 72 hours each week by 2 leadership for ANY reason? So 3 days a week, for any reason.... Beyond discrimination being rampant for that, it can lead to favoritism; well the opposite or used as a threat. A closed meeting for leadership, causes transparency issues, this goes against the maker/hackerspace mentality as a whole. Long term suspensions for 90 days, and have to pay, thats $150 for no access and no voting, so basically no membership. If it does go to a Quorom vote, we can't get them on the current changes to an addendum, what makes us think we can hit it for a suspension for "any reason"? 1/4 vote no removes? This should at least be a majority vote of membership.
In my opinion we should off on the special meeting until we have a finalized thing to vote on. If we do Vote 2, 3, 4, 8, & 9 should be removed.
Elly, This shouldn't be a connections for a lawyer to look at. This should be something we pay a professional to look at and give his/her full professional stamp of approval on. Legal advice can come at a high price for an attorney to give as a favor.
I just met him tonight at my town council meeting, he is running for judge, he may be willing to do it as a charitable donation.
Ok long email incoming,
I am burnt out on bylaws discussions but I am going to do my best to help out in explaining the "Mailing List as a Right" as it was largely my idea and I have been considering it, in one form or another, for over a year:
The topic of whether a member can be removed from the mailing list, either temporarily or permanently, has been brought up in the past under various circumstances. My opinion is that the right of members to have access to the mailing list is already implied in the bylaws by these two facts:
A. Discussing votes of the membership is a right of membership
B. The mailing list is the only communication method specifically mentioned in the bylaws for vote discussion.
However, it came to my attention that this interpretation is not necessarily shared by everyone. As such I decided that I would like this right spelled out explicitly rather than implicitly.
So, to clarify:
This will NOT remove non-members from the mailing list. This
simply guarantees access to members, whereas non-members, as has
always been the case, can be removed if they are being disruptive.
This will link mailing list access with physical access as a right. i.e. Removal of access to the mailing list cannot be considered unless removal from the physical space is also being considered.
This is not spelled out yet but I think it should be added:
Access to the mailing list should be removed for suspended members
IF and ONLY IF that suspension is as a result of mailing list
behavior. It should NOT be an automatic reaction to any suspension
(even if other membership rights are being removed) so that any
suspended member can be involved in the discussion thereof.
(Access to contact the leadership list will never be removed).
As CTO I pretty much have unrestricted control of the mailing list. I know that I am not going to abuse that ability, but that's no excuse for it being an option. My highest priority in my position is transparency and member rights. The goal here is to make silencing a voice, any voice, more difficult.
I welcome suggestions for improvement.
- Ian B.
Geez, I came over all political there for a minute didn't I? :)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
I could get behind this sort of procedure, in addition to any refinements others may suggest.Do we need any sort of clause on how to handle things if the accused IS a member of the Leadership, or will the proposed addition be sufficient to imply that an accused party who is also in Leadership will not be allowed in the private introductory hearing?
--
There is already a "Conflict of Interest" section in the bylaws, however it specifically refers only to board members. This could be modified to include all Leadership (perhaps as part of Vote 5?).
After reading Elly's explanation I am now leaning the other way
on the Closed Meeting issue. But I definitely think the wording
needs to be modified to make the intention clear.
Ian B.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
Next, if you decide to drop your membership during the 90 days instead of paying the forced $150 "membership", when you sign back up you are a "Probationary" member. A probationary member's membership can be immediately terminated by a 1/3 vote of the leadership. The same leadership which would have voted to suspend your membership in the first place.
Possible proposals to fix some of these potential loopholes and issues:
I am not trying to be difficult, I am just trying to think of how these rules can be abused. I feel like there is a sentiment of "If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear" which is not the right want to write rules which will govern you.
I am not sure what the rush is in trying to get these changes approved. I would support us finalizing these changes before scheduling the date of the special meeting to approve them.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hive13 Hackerspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cincihackerspa...@googlegroups.com.
Basically, there is safety... and then there is social... as long as people have a clear idea of the ethics and goals, and insist on meeting them, then things should be okay. Okay, so there are bumps in the road. Any organization needs to be able to discipline or expel those who are totally disruptive.