<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:DontVertAlignCellWithSp/>
<w:DontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
<w:Word11KerningPairs/>
<w:CachedColBalance/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"><span style="font-style: italic;">Thanks Tim! See my comments/responses below</span></span></div><div style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: italic;" class="MsoNormal"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: italic;" class="MsoNormal">Jeff T<br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;" class="MsoNormal"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;" class="MsoNormal">October 13, 2013<br>
<br>
Hi gang --<br>
<br>
Well, Monday the 14th is the date we agreed to for interested people to comment<br>
on the material posted by the Key Committee. I have enough comments that I did<br>
not think it appropriate to scribble them all over the Key Committe's web page,<br>
so I have put them in this long email. They are in sections like the ones on<br>
that page.<br>
<br>
So, grab your scuba gear and dive in:<br>
<br>
Section: Key Policy Development<br>
<br>
We (all of us in Davis Makerspace) are basically trying to decide how to grant<br>
digital access (as compared to physical keys) to people.<br>
<br>
It's an important decision because we need to be responsible tenants in our<br>
rental space, because we have stuff that could be stolen, and because we have<br>
stuff that could be at least theoretically dangerous (for example, somebody<br>
could fall off of our ladder, or hit their thumb with one of our hammers, or
cut<br>
themselves with our scissors, and so on... not to mention the fusion reactor<br>
that I hope to build soon...)<br>
<br>
Those are considerations of responsibility; access and responsibility are tied<br>
together.<br>
<br>
What other related ideas have come up so far in meetings and emails?<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span style="color:red">Only one other email has been received thus far, (which was
prepared by Jim Stewart on 10/9</span></i><br>
<br>
James has proposed that "Directors and door maintainers should have a
physical<br>
key in case of power outage or misbehaving software, but (anonymous) physical<br>
keys should only be used if (traceable) digital keys are unavailable."<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><br>
<br>
That sounds like a good idea to me.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span style="color:red">OK</span></i><br>
<br>
And I believe that it was James that suggested that we recall the physical keys<br>
from all the other folks, once the digital key system is working well.<br>
<br>
That also sounds like a wise thing to do.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">
</span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span style="color:red">OK</span></i><br>
<br>
Section: Model Options<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span style="color:red">(There was a lot of
information here, so I saved most of my comments for the summary section at the
end)</span></i><br>
<br>
This is the core of the issue. Assuming that the ideas listed directly above<br>
are accepted, we are "only" left with choosing the policy for
granting digital<br>
access.<br>
<br>
The simplest policy -- to allow anybody access to the space -- would not work.<br>
There are simply too many irresponsible people in the world for us to let<br>
everybody and anybody have access to the space. For example, a few months ago I<br>
had ask some of the space's neighbors to call the police because some teenagers<br>
were trying to climb onto the roof of one of the buildings near the space...<br>
the same group had already checked out the space's doorway pretty carefully,<br>
and left in a hurry as soon as I walked out into the alley. We should only give<br>
access to people whom we can trust; unlimited access isn't responsible access.<br>
(I don't think it was a real alternative, anyway.)<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><br>
<br>
We do have bylaws about eligibility for voting, so one possible decision method<br>
would be for all eligible voters to vote on granting digital access to a<br>
particular applicant. I don't think that would be responsible access, and I<br>
doubt that we could get the necessary consensus. So I don't favor that
"general<br>
vote" method.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><br>
<br>
One possibility is to have a trusted sub-group actually make the decision on<br>
granting digital access to a particular person. For example, we could leave<br>
that decision to our Board of Directors.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">
</span><br>
<br>
Another possibility is to have some condition(s) that must be fulfilled in<br>
order to gain digital access. Sort of an automatic rule "Do this and that
and<br>
the other, and you will get digital access."<br>
<br>
But neither of those simple approaches were instantly and unanimously accepted,<br>
so we created the Key Committee and started compiling our thoughts.<br>
<br>
James has said that he would "like to see a system where people who
contribute<br>
to the space get a digital (and revocable!) key." He listed three kinds of<br>
contributions:<br>
* Offering to open and oversee the space during "open hours" (i.e.,
offering to<br>
contribute time, personal energy, and responsibility).<br>
* Coming in to the space to work on the door or fix the wiring (i.e., actually<br>
contributing expertise in the form of real labor).<br>
* Making a financial contribution.<br>
<br>
Braden said he would "like to see the general philosophy be:<br>
* Key access does represent one taking on part of the shared
responsibility<br>
for stewardship of the space.<br>
* Key access does _not_ represent a reward."<br>
<br>
And Braden has said that he believes that philosophy "would also
discourage<br>
key-holding members from using the space only for personal projects, or a<br>
"co-working" space (e.g. rent-a-desk), or storage, etc., even if they<br>
contributed something else of value to the space (time, money, materials)"<br>
<br>
I think that Braden's philosophy of stewardship fits in well with the matters<br>
of responsibility already mentioned. I think Braden's philosophy is the right<br>
foundation upon which to build a policy of granting digital access.<br>
<br>
I also think that it is clear that James' second kind of contribution<br>
(actually performing expert labor) is part of being a responsible steward of<br>
the space.<br>
<br>
But I don't think James' first kind of contribution (offering to help)<br>
or his third kind of contribution (money) are good enough.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><br>
<br>
After all, we are talking about granting digital access to trustworthy people.<br>
It's all about trust.<br>
<br>
How does an existing trustworthy group (call them "T") decide that
somebody<br>
else ("X") is trustworthy?<br>
<br>
I don't think it should be a matter of money contributed by "X".
Giving "X"<br>
digital access because they contributed, say, $90, doesn't make sense if
"X"<br>
then has the opportunity to steal a $600 digital printer. Or to steal a piece
of<br>
handmade art that somebody has lovingly hung upon our wall. Or if it gives
"X"<br>
the chance to goof around in the space, hurt themselves, and cause lots of<br>
emotional and insurance/financial woe to the group. Money doesn't prove that<br>
you are responsible or trustworthy; it only proves that you have some money.<br>
<br>
Similarly, I don't think that it should be a matter of "X" fulfilling
a set of<br>
conditions such as "You offered to run the space for 4 hours per week (or
sweep<br>
the floors once a week, or whatever), so you get a digital key." That's a<br>
system that can be gamed too easily.<br>
<br>
Instead, I feel that, for a group of our type and size, it should be a question<br>
of "T's" experience with people, plus watching for subsequent good
behavior on<br>
the part of "X". If all of the members of "T" feel, based
on their experience<br>
in the school of life, that "X" is trustworthy of being a steward,
then they<br>
should grant digital access to "X" on a probationary basis.<br>
<br>
And since "X" is on probation, I don't think that "X"
should become a part of<br>
"T"; the new person should not get to decide on admitting other new
people.<br>
For that important responsibility, they need to have demonstrated that they<br>
are trustworthy.<br>
<br>
This still allows Jordan's "sponsorship" proposal to work. I believe
that it<br>
was Jordan who proposed that an already well-trusted member ("T") of
the group<br>
could "sponsor" somebody that they they felt needed digital access in
order to<br>
do good things for the group. So Braden proposed that Lucian get digital<br>
access, and we voted and accepted it.<br>
<br>
I think that it would be better to have the Board make those decisions in the<br>
future: only the Board should act as "T". Otherwise, if all the
voting members<br>
act as "T", probation doesn't happen: the new steward gets to vote
right away<br>
on giving access rights to other new applicants.<br>
<br>
Similarly, I think that only the Board should get to act as sponsors. It<br>
doesn't work to have general members act as sponsors for stewards; after all,<br>
a general member might not be trustworthy themselves, much less their<br>
candidate! Whereas the Board is presumed to be trustworthy (because we all<br>
voted them into office), and so we can assume that they are proposing<br>
good candidate stewards. And to be extra cautious, I think that any member of<br>
the Board should only get to sponsor one or two stewards a year.<br>
<br>
I think there can be different kinds of stewards; they are not necessarily<br>
only that group of people who run the space during open hours. For example,<br>
digital access is needed by the people who maintain the door access equipment.<br>
Someday we might have a specialist who knows how to maintain a potentially<br>
dangerous laser cutter; that person might not be a Board member, so they<br>
wouldn't automatically get a physical key. The candy czar needs to be able to<br>
service and stock the snack system. And so on. Note that all of those types of<br>
stewards are primarily concerned with sharing responsibility for stewardship<br>
of the space (Braden's philosophy).<br>
<br>
So to summarize (Thank heavens! I thought he would blather on forever!) my<br>
preferences for the Model Options:<br>
<br>
* I oppose the Fee Model.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span style="color:red">Many people are
advocating a fee option.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>It would be
nice to encourage regular donations in order to meet our annual expenses as
well.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>There is also the possibility that
a resolution would not pass consensus without some form of the fee model.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Would you be open to a fee model if we
incorporated a sponsorship mechanism as well?<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">
</span>This would promote more donations, which are needed, while helping to
ensure trustworthyness though sponsorship.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">
</span>Also, if we decide not to do a fee model, if there is anyone who
currently has key access and are currently making regular donations under the
old rules, would they lose key access?<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>I
currently make a $30 monthly donation.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">
</span>If I turn my board member and open hour duties over to someone else next
year, would I lose my key access?<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>This
should be addressed with any new policy we make that changes the old
arrangement.</span></i><br>
<br>
* I propose combining the Volunteer Model and the Sponsorship Model into one<br>
new "Steward Model". It would be rewritten to emphasize a sense of<br>
responsibility (as compared to emphasizing "volunteer tasks"). I
think the<br>
explicit and only purpose for granting digital access should be as a necessary<br>
part of being a "steward" for our space. There would be several kinds
of<br>
steward; the distinctions would be by their main technical responsbilities<br>
(e.g., Running Open Hours, Maintaining the Fusion Reactor, Candy Czar, etc.).<br>
Only Directors would be able to sponsor stewards. A Director could sponsor at<br>
most one or two new stewards per year. Stewardships would have well-defined<br>
probationary periods, after which their terms would be indefinite periods,<br>
subject to revocation by the Board of Directors. Only the Board of Directors<br>
would vote to accept a sponsored steward.<u style="text-underline:words"> </u><span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span style="color:red">What is the difference between the probationary period and the
indefinite period subject to revocation by the Board?</span></i> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">Also, Jim Stewert has proposed the idea of making a key
holder committee, who would basically recommend potential key holders to the
board.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>This would basically be a similar
vetting scheme where a group would evaluate the trustworthiness of a potential keyholder
and either recommend or deny a proposed keyholder.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>The board would then vote on anyone who was
recommended, again making an evaluation of trustworthiness.<br>
<br>
* I would remove the Combination of Models, replacing it with the new Steward<br>
Model.<br>
<br>
Section: Responsibilities<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span style="color:red">(All this has been
noted, thank you.)</span></i><br>
<br>
Responsibilities are what stewardship is all about, by definition.<br>
<br>
The page mentions some specific responsibilities.<br>
<br>
* Cleaning the space is good, sure. Some existing key holders do it themselves<br>
pretty much automatically. My life experience says: Encourage such people, but<br>
don't expect to succeed in forcing others to be that way.<br>
<br>
* I don't believe that it is practical to have every steward be able to train<br>
people on every piece of equipment. That's one reason that there would be<br>
several kinds of stewards. But every steward in charge of Running Open Hours<br>
should be able to train people on basic nonlethal equipment. Specialists would<br>
be needed to train people for the laser cutter and the fusion reactor, for<br>
example.<br>
<br>
* The newly-appointed candy czar (ahem) already has the responsibility for<br>
restocking the vending machine. <br>
<br>
Section: Procedure Options for Gaining Key Access<br>
<br>
I've always felt that this section should have been part of the Model Options<br>
section... see above.<br>
<br>
Section: Revocation of Key Access<br>
<br>
This is absolutely necessary, of course.<br>
<br>
* Under the Steward Model the first two reasons would not be needed<br>
(discontinuation of regular donations or regular volunteer activities).<br>
<br>
* "Significant violation of DMS rules or policies" would still be
needed.<br>
<br>
* "Voting". I think this means that the Board could vote to revoke a
person's<br>
digital access. This needs some guidelines. Also, should the Board be able<br>
to revoke digital access in a non-public meeting, for example to stave off<br>
a lawsuit?<span style="color:red"><span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">See my comment below</i></span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><br>
</i><br>
I think that resigning as a steward should also cause automatic revocation<br>
of digital access.<br>
<br>
Since I would think the Board should be the group that votes on stewards<br>
proposed by individual Directors, the Board should also be the group that votes<br>
on revoking digital access.<br>
<br>
I believe that our recently revised bylaws would allow any voting member to<br>
bring up a vote on any issue (such as revoking access for a crummy steward) at<br>
a monthly meeting. So "at worst" it should take one month for a
general outcry<br>
to cause the revocation of access for a steward, assuming that the Board bowed<br>
to the will of the voting members on the subject ("So passes Denethor, son
of<br>
Ecthelion...").<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span style="color:red">This was my original
intention with the voting suggestion on the wiki page.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>A vote by board (or keyholder committee) or the
entire group would be fine with me.</span></i><br>
<br>
I think it is great that we are discussing these matters that are important<br>
to our group! Thank you Jeff and Braden on the Key Committee, and thank you<br>
to the others who have participated!<br>
<br>
Cheers!<br>
<br>
-- Tim F<span style="color:red"></span></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]--><div><span></span></div><div><br></div> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div dir="ltr"> <hr size="1"> <font face="Arial" size="2"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Tim F <davispcug@yahoo.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> discuss@davismakerspace.org <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Monday, October 14, 2013 12:21 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> [dms-discuss] Comments on Key Committee and digital access<br> </font> </div> <div class="y_msg_container"><br>
October 13, 2013<br><br>Hi gang --<br><br>Well, Monday the 14th is the date we agreed to for interested people to comment<br>on the material posted by the Key Committee. I have enough comments that I did<br>not think it appropriate to scribble them all over the Key Committe's web page,<br>so I have put them in this long email. They are in sections like the ones on<br>that page.<br><br>So, grab your scuba gear and dive in:<br><br>Section: Key Policy Development<br><br>We (all of us in Davis Makerspace) are basically trying to decide how to grant<br>digital access (as compared to physical keys) to people.<br><br>It's an important decision because we need to be responsible tenants in our<br>rental space, because we have stuff that could be stolen, and because we have<br>stuff that could be at least theoretically dangerous (for example, somebody<br>could fall off of our ladder, or hit their thumb with one of our hammers, or cut<br>themselves with our
scissors, and so on... not to mention the fusion reactor<br>that I hope to build soon...)<br><br>Those are considerations of responsibility; access and responsibility are tied<br>together.<br><br>What other related ideas have come up so far in meetings and emails?<br><br>James has proposed that "Directors and door maintainers should have a physical<br>key in case of power outage or misbehaving software, but (anonymous) physical<br>keys should only be used if (traceable) digital keys are unavailable."<br><br>That sounds like a good idea to me.<br><br>And I believe that it was James that suggested that we recall the physical keys<br>from all the other folks, once the digital key system is working well.<br><br>That also sounds like a wise thing to do.<br><br>Section: Model Options<br><br>This is the core of the issue. Assuming that the ideas listed directly above<br>are accepted, we are "only" left with choosing the policy for granting
digital<br>access.<br><br>The simplest policy -- to allow anybody access to the space -- would not work.<br>There are simply too many irresponsible people in the world for us to let<br>everybody and anybody have access to the space. For example, a few months ago I<br>had ask some of the space's neighbors to call the police because some teenagers<br>were trying to climb onto the roof of one of the buildings near the space...<br>the same group had already checked out the space's doorway pretty carefully,<br>and left in a hurry as soon as I walked out into the alley. We should only give<br>access to people whom we can trust; unlimited access isn't responsible access.<br>(I don't think it was a real alternative, anyway.)<br><br>We do have bylaws about eligibility for voting, so one possible decision method<br>would be for all eligible voters to vote on granting digital access to a<br>particular applicant. I don't think that would be responsible access, and
I<br>doubt that we could get the necessary consensus. So I don't favor that "general<br>vote" method.<br><br>One possibility is to have a trusted sub-group actually make the decision on<br>granting digital access to a particular person. For example, we could leave<br>that decision to our Board of Directors.<br><br>Another possibility is to have some condition(s) that must be fulfilled in<br>order to gain digital access. Sort of an automatic rule "Do this and that and<br>the other, and you will get digital access."<br><br>But neither of those simple approaches were instantly and unanimously accepted,<br>so we created the Key Committee and started compiling our thoughts.<br><br>James has said that he would "like to see a system where people who contribute<br>to the space get a digital (and revocable!) key." He listed three kinds of<br>contributions:<br>* Offering to open and oversee the space during "open hours" (i.e., offering to<br>contribute time,
personal energy, and responsibility).<br>* Coming in to the space to work on the door or fix the wiring (i.e., actually<br>contributing expertise in the form of real labor).<br>* Making a financial contribution.<br><br>Braden said he would "like to see the general philosophy be:<br> * Key access does represent one taking on part of the shared responsibility<br>for stewardship of the space.<br> * Key access does _not_ represent a reward."<br><br>And Braden has said that he believes that philosophy "would also discourage<br>key-holding members from using the space only for personal projects, or a<br>"co-working" space (e.g. rent-a-desk), or storage, etc., even if they<br>contributed something else of value to the space (time, money, materials)"<br><br>I think that Braden's philosophy of stewardship fits in well with the matters<br>of responsibility already mentioned. I think Braden's philosophy is the right<br>foundation upon which to build a
policy of granting digital access.<br><br>I also think that it is clear that James' second kind of contribution<br>(actually performing expert labor) is part of being a responsible steward of<br>the space.<br><br>But I don't think James' first kind of contribution (offering to help)<br>or his third kind of contribution (money) are good enough.<br><br>After all, we are talking about granting digital access to trustworthy people.<br>It's all about trust.<br><br>How does an existing trustworthy group (call them "T") decide that somebody<br>else ("X") is trustworthy?<br><br>I don't think it should be a matter of money contributed by "X". Giving "X"<br>digital access because they contributed, say, $90, doesn't make sense if "X"<br>then has the opportunity to steal a $600 digital printer. Or to steal a piece of<br>handmade art that somebody has lovingly hung upon our wall. Or if it gives "X"<br>the chance to goof around in the space, hurt themselves, and
cause lots of<br>emotional and insurance/financial woe to the group. Money doesn't prove that<br>you are responsible or trustworthy; it only proves that you have some money.<br><br>Similarly, I don't think that it should be a matter of "X" fulfilling a set of<br>conditions such as "You offered to run the space for 4 hours per week (or sweep<br>the floors once a week, or whatever), so you get a digital key." That's a<br>system that can be gamed too easily.<br><br>Instead, I feel that, for a group of our type and size, it should be a question<br>of "T's" experience with people, plus watching for subsequent good behavior on<br>the part of "X". If all of the members of "T" feel, based on their experience<br>in the school of life, that "X" is trustworthy of being a steward, then they<br>should grant digital access to "X" on a probationary basis.<br><br>And since "X" is on probation, I don't think that "X" should become a part of<br>"T"; the new person should
not get to decide on admitting other new people.<br>For that important responsibility, they need to have demonstrated that they<br>are trustworthy.<br><br>This still allows Jordan's "sponsorship" proposal to work. I believe that it<br>was Jordan who proposed that an already well-trusted member ("T") of the group<br>could "sponsor" somebody that they they felt needed digital access in order to<br>do good things for the group. So Braden proposed that Lucian get digital<br>access, and we voted and accepted it.<br><br>I think that it would be better to have the Board make those decisions in the<br>future: only the Board should act as "T". Otherwise, if all the voting members<br>act as "T", probation doesn't happen: the new steward gets to vote right away<br>on giving access rights to other new applicants.<br><br>Similarly, I think that only the Board should get to act as sponsors. It<br>doesn't work to have general members act as sponsors for stewards;
after all,<br>a general member might not be trustworthy themselves, much less their<br>candidate! Whereas the Board is presumed to be trustworthy (because we all<br>voted them into office), and so we can assume that they are proposing<br>good candidate stewards. And to be extra cautious, I think that any member of<br>the Board should only get to sponsor one or two stewards a year.<br><br>I think there can be different kinds of stewards; they are not necessarily<br>only that group of people who run the space during open hours. For example,<br>digital access is needed by the people who maintain the door access equipment.<br>Someday we might have a specialist who knows how to maintain a potentially<br>dangerous laser cutter; that person might not be a Board member, so they<br>wouldn't automatically get a physical key. The candy czar needs to be able to<br>service and stock the snack system. And so on. Note that all of those types of<br>stewards are
primarily concerned with sharing responsibility for stewardship<br>of the space (Braden's philosophy).<br><br>So to summarize (Thank heavens! I thought he would blather on forever!) my<br>preferences for the Model Options:<br><br>* I oppose the Fee Model.<br><br>* I propose combining the Volunteer Model and the Sponsorship Model into one<br>new "Steward Model". It would be rewritten to emphasize a sense of<br>responsibility (as compared to emphasizing "volunteer tasks"). I think the<br>explicit and only purpose for granting digital access should be as a necessary<br>part of being a "steward" for our space. There would be several kinds of<br>steward; the distinctions would be by their main technical responsbilities<br>(e.g., Running Open Hours, Maintaining the Fusion Reactor, Candy Czar, etc.).<br>Only Directors would be able to sponsor stewards. A Director could sponsor at<br>most one or two new stewards per year. Stewardships would have
well-defined<br>probationary periods, after which their terms would be indefinite periods,<br>subject to revocation by the Board of Directors. Only the Board of Directors<br>would vote to accept a sponsored steward.<br><br>* I would remove the Combination of Models, replacing it with the new Steward<br>Model.<br><br>Section: Responsibilities<br><br>Responsibilities are what stewardship is all about, by definition.<br><br>The page mentions some specific responsibilities.<br><br>* Cleaning the space is good, sure. Some existing key holders do it themselves<br>pretty much automatically. My life experience says: Encourage such people, but<br>don't expect to succeed in forcing others to be that way.<br><br>* I don't believe that it is practical to have every steward be able to train<br>people on every piece of equipment. That's one reason that there would be<br>several kinds of stewards. But every steward in charge of Running Open Hours<br>should be able to
train people on basic nonlethal equipment. Specialists would<br>be needed to train people for the laser cutter and the fusion reactor, for<br>example.<br><br>* The newly-appointed candy czar (ahem) already has the responsibility for<br>restocking the vending machine. <br><br>Section: Procedure Options for Gaining Key Access<br><br>I've always felt that this section should have been part of the Model Options<br>section... see above.<br><br>Section: Revocation of Key Access<br><br>This is absolutely necessary, of course.<br><br>* Under the Steward Model the first two reasons would not be needed<br>(discontinuation of regular donations or regular volunteer activities).<br><br>* "Significant violation of DMS rules or policies" would still be needed.<br><br>* "Voting". I think this means that the Board could vote to revoke a person's<br>digital access. This needs some guidelines. Also, should the Board be able<br>to revoke digital access in a non-public
meeting, for example to stave off<br>a lawsuit?<br><br>I think that resigning as a steward should also cause automatic revocation<br>of digital access.<br><br>Since I would think the Board should be the group that votes on stewards<br>proposed by individual Directors, the Board should also be the group that votes<br>on revoking digital access.<br><br>I believe that our recently revised bylaws would allow any voting member to<br>bring up a vote on any issue (such as revoking access for a crummy steward) at<br>a monthly meeting. So "at worst" it should take one month for a general outcry<br>to cause the revocation of access for a steward, assuming that the Board bowed<br>to the will of the voting members on the subject ("So passes Denethor, son of<br>Ecthelion...").<br><br>I think it is great that we are discussing these matters that are important<br>to our group! Thank you Jeff and Braden on the Key Committee, and thank you<br>to the others who have
participated!<br><br>Cheers!<br><br>-- Tim F<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Discuss mailing list<br><a ymailto="mailto:Discuss@lists.davismakerspace.org" href="mailto:Discuss@lists.davismakerspace.org">Discuss@lists.davismakerspace.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.davismakerspace.org/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.davismakerspace.org/listinfo/discuss</a><br><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></body></html>