Noisebridge Cabal Archive

These email threads from the noisebridge-discuss mailing list capture the community's reaction to the Cabal governance changes and the intense debate that followed.

Mailing List Discussion Timeline

Between March 13 and April 23, 2014, the Noisebridge community engaged in intense debate about governance, consensus, and the board's role. These threads show the controversy as it unfolded in real-time.

Key Email Threads

Expresses support for more active board but asks for clarification on what requires consensus vs. board decisions. Specifically wants board to address people living at the space.

View original on lists.noisebridge.net →

Responds to Al Sweigart's statement about blocking, arguing it contradicts core consensus principles. Notes she'll share detailed thoughts about consensus mechanics.

View original on lists.noisebridge.net →

Board announcement of governance changes including new membership and consensus processes, membership meeting on April 1st, dues starting in April. References board minutes from 2014-03-12.

View original on lists.noisebridge.net →

Argues against consensus with 5 critiques: stifles evolution, unequal impact, limits radical change, perpetuates unresolved issues, alienates creative members. Frames this as critical juncture requiring systemic change.

View original on lists.noisebridge.net →

Proposes focused discussion of board policies. Supports eliminating two-tier membership but questions mandatory $80 dues and linking membership to space access.

View original on lists.noisebridge.net →

Advocates for genuine consensus as good-faith collaborative process rather than simple blocking mechanism. Encourages experimenting with decision-making systems. Notes Mitch Altman's potential departure.

View original on lists.noisebridge.net →

Board announcement that recent bureaucracy modifications have been undone pending broader community input. Board implementing policies for extended review periods. Emphasizes this is isolated action, not new precedent.

View original on lists.noisebridge.net →

Raises concerns about legitimacy of board election. Notes that membership deadline was never set but voting list was shortened anyway, disenfranchising members. Calls for redo despite being elected herself.

View original on lists.noisebridge.net →

Proposes eliminating 'council membership' and restoring associate member category. Notes associate member has gained grassroots adoption while council membership failed and enabled 'self-righteous busybodies'. This corresponds to PR #35.

View original on lists.noisebridge.net →

Timeline Context

These email discussions happened in parallel with the GitHub activity:

About the Mailing List

The noisebridge-discuss mailing list has been the primary communication channel for the Noisebridge community since its founding. During March-April 2014, it saw heated debate about the nature of consensus, the role of the board, and what it means to be a member of Noisebridge.

The complete archives are available at lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/