Pattern 8: Unilateral Authority Claims

The Pattern

Collaborative vs. Unilateral Authority

Example 1: "If I Say It's Unsafe" (November 2025)

The Incident

Elle raised accessibility concerns about someone working on the patio.

Elle's Authority Claim

EigenVexer's Response

The Authority Claim

• Collaborative approach: "I'm concerned about safety because [reasons]. Can we discuss?"
• Elle's claim: "If I say it's unsafe, then it's unsafe" (unilateral authority)
• Effect: Bypasses discussion, requires compliance
• Noisebridge reality: Safety determinations involve discussion and consensus, not unilateral pronouncements

Example 2: "All Tuesdays Are Bad" (December 2025)

Elle's Authority Claim

The Reality

Ms. Judy (actual sewing area authority): Said events were fine with the door closed.

The Conflict

• Elle's unilateral claim: "All Tuesdays are bad"
• Ms. Judy (earned authority): "It's fine with door closed"
• The difference: Ms. Judy's authority comes from role and expertise; Elle claims authority without basis

Example 3: 24-Hour Ban for Romy (May 29, 2025)

Elle's Authority Claim

The Authority Claim

• What Elle claimed authority to do: Unilaterally ban someone from Discord for 24 hours
• Actual Noisebridge process: Moderation decisions involve discussion, often through Safety Council
• What happened: No one challenged Elle's authority; Romy went silent for 4 months
• Result: Unilateral authority claim succeeded through non-challenge

How Unilateral Authority Claims Work

Why This Escalates Unnecessarily

1. Bypasses Dialogue (Stages 1-3)

Normal conflict resolution involves discussion:

• Stage 1-2: "I'm concerned about X" → "Let's discuss"
• Stage 3: "Let's try this approach"
• Unilateral authority: Jumps directly to "This is how it is"

2. Creates Compliance or Confrontation Dynamic

When authority is claimed unilaterally:

• Others must either comply or directly challenge
• Middle ground (discussion) is eliminated
• Raises stakes unnecessarily
• Forces Stage 6 (threats/ultimatums) response

3. Normalizes Unilateral Decision-Making

If unchallenged:

• Community learns that Elle can make unilateral decisions
• Precedent set for future authority claims
• Consensus-based culture eroded
• Others may imitate the pattern

4. Creates Conflicting Authorities

When claimed authority conflicts with actual authority:

• Elle: "All Tuesdays are bad"
• Ms. Judy: "It's fine with door closed"
• Community must choose which "authority" to follow
• Confusion about governance

Earned vs. Claimed Authority

Examples at Noisebridge

Earned Authority

• Area maintainers: Ms. Judy can make decisions about sewing area (community-recognized role)
• Safety Council: Has authority to make safety decisions (consensus-granted)
• Consensus process: Community has authority through established process

Claimed Authority (This Pattern)

• Elle → Safety: "If I say it's unsafe, then it's unsafe" (no role, expertise, or consensus)
• Elle → Scheduling: "All Tuesdays are bad" (contradicts actual area authority)
• Elle → Moderation: "I demand you leave Discord" (no moderation role)

Why Community Didn't Challenge

Possible Reasons for Non-Challenge

1. Uncertainty about processes: "Is Elle allowed to do this? I don't know the rules..."
2. Social risk: Challenging might lead to being targeted with Patterns 1-7
3. Benefit of doubt: "Maybe she has authority I'm not aware of"
4. Conflict avoidance: Easier to comply than confront
5. Previous pattern observation: Saw what happened to Wyatt, Cloud, Romy

The Result

• Romy: Went silent for 4 months after 24-hour ban demand
• EigenVexer: Did eventually push back on "if I say it's unsafe"
• Pattern: Most authority claims went unchallenged
• Effect: Claimed authority became de facto real authority

Community Impact

Governance Erosion

• Consensus bypassed: Unilateral decisions replace discussion
• Process confusion: "Who has authority to do what?"
• Conflicting authorities: Elle vs. Ms. Judy vs. Safety Council
• Precedent set: Unilateral authority claims succeed if unchallenged

Contributor Impact

• Romy: 4-month silence after ban demand
• Others: May comply rather than challenge
• Chilling effect: Participation becomes risky if unilateral rules can be imposed

Culture Shift

• From consensus-based to authority-based
• From dialogue to compliance
• From earned authority to claimed authority
• From "do-ocracy" to "pronounce-ocracy"

How to Counter This Pattern

If Authority is Claimed Over You

1. Question the basis: "What authority do you have to make this decision?"
2. Refer to process: "At Noisebridge, we make these decisions through [process]."
3. Assert collaborative approach: "Let's discuss this, not pronounce it."
4. Escalate if needed: "Let's bring this to Safety Council / weekly meeting."

If You Witness Unilateral Authority Claims

1. Question immediately: "Is this how we make decisions here?"
2. Note the pattern: "This is the third time I've seen unilateral decisions."
3. Support the target: "Romy, you don't have to leave - this wasn't decided properly."
4. Reinforce process: "At Noisebridge, we [actual process]."

For Community Governance

1. Clarify authority structures: Who has authority for what decisions?
2. Document processes: Clear wiki pages for how decisions are made
3. Challenge promptly: Don't let claimed authority succeed through silence
4. Educate continuously: Teach newcomers about actual vs. claimed authority
5. Protect consensus culture: Actively resist bypassing dialogue

What Makes This Stage-Skipping

Normal Conflict Progression (Stages 1-3)

Stage 1-2: Concern raised
    "I'm worried about accessibility on the patio"
    "Let's discuss what makes it safe"

Stage 2-3: Discussion and resolution
    Share perspectives
    Find consensus
    Implement agreed solution

Unilateral Authority (Skip to Stage 6)

Stage 2: Concern raised
    "I'm worried about accessibility"

[SKIP discussion and consensus]

Stage 6: Ultimatum
    "If I say it's unsafe, then it's unsafe"
    Compliance demanded
    No negotiation offered

The Self-Appointed Enforcer Pattern

The Pattern Across Incidents

1. Claims authority to determine what's safe, who should leave, what rules exist
2. Issues enforcement actions: 24-hour bans, ATLs, demands for compliance
3. Community doesn't challenge (due to social risk, uncertainty, previous pattern observation)
4. Claimed authority functions as real authority through non-challenge
5. Targets comply or withdraw (Romy 4-month silence, Wyatt considered leaving)
6. Pattern reinforces itself (success of unchallenged claims leads to more claims)

The Result

A de facto enforcement authority that exists not through role, expertise, or consensus, but through pattern of unchallenged claims.