[dms-discuss] Initial Key Policy

Jeff Tolentino jefftolentino at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 18 14:22:47 PDT 2014

I think teaching a class could be worthy of a key if it were on a periodic basis, (say weekly).  If it were a one off event, then I would not see that as warrenting key access.  Cleaning up after open hours seems like a task that is to small to warrent key-access (imo).  

I'd also like to resubmit my favoritism for regular donations as a means for key access.  This helps us maintain our infrastructure by letting us pay for rent, Internet service, etc.  (Incidentally, I won't vote against this policy without a donation option, but I think we are missing an opportunity by not encouraging regular donations.  It seems like we have been pretty tight on budget for most of the year, and it would be nice if we could encourage monetary donatios from people who have ability to do so.)


On Tue, 3/18/14, James R Holliday <jrholliday at davismakerspace.org> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [dms-discuss] Initial Key Policy
 To: discuss at davismakerspace.org
 Date: Tuesday, March 18, 2014, 2:01 PM
 Thanks for feedback!  We have until Monday before we
 need to present a
 "final" version for review.
 > 1) I like that it attempts to set policy on why keys
 will be issued. 
 > 2) I like the part about "hold regular open hours".
 > 3) I like the part about being "free to close the door
 behind you".
 > 4) I like the "general philosophy" section.
 So far, so good :)
 > 5) The "general philosophy" section says that "Everyone
 in the Davis
 > community should have access to the space." I note that
 they already
 > CAN have access: all they have to do is show up during
 the open hours
 > listed on the wiki. Or they can contact one of the
 volunteers on the
 > wiki to arrange special hours. But they don't NEED a
 key; there is no
 > NEED to give a key to anybody that wants a key.
 > 6) The Space has existed for a year without needing to
 grant lots of
 > key access. We have already proven that we can make it
 without the
 > risk of giving out lots of keys. Accordingly, I think
 that we should
 > actively plan to protect and enhance our infrastructure
 by being
 > careful to not give out keys unless they are actually
 I can see what you mean.  And there certainly haven't
 to date been too
 many requests for "off-hours" access.  I think when we
 first envisioned
 the space, however, there was a sizeable group of people who
 having unrestricted access to the space.  Should we
 proceed in a way
 that preserves that (future) option, should we outline a
 path that helps
 promote more open hours and negates the need, or is there a
 middle ground?
 > 7) So I don't like the part about "money and/or
 accepted tools" being
 > a way to get a key. I think that's asking for trouble.
 I agree with you: this does sound like an end-run around the
 "no special
 benefits in return for money" requirement.  I included
 those bullet
 point examples to be as general as possible.  Perhaps
 that's too general?
 > 9) So I think that the only reason to have a key should
 be because
 > you need a key as part of making significant,
 responsible, repeated
 > (not merely casual) contributions of time and effort to
 the space,
 > [...]
 I like the sound of that...
 > in three ways: by being a member of the Board; or by
 holding regular
 > and frequent open hours; or by maintaining the Space's
 > 10) Accordingly, I don't think "Teach a class" or "Help
 clean up
 > after open house" by themselves should be reasons to
 get a key.
 I'm requesting others chime in here.  I could see
 "Teach a class"
 becoming "hold regular classes" and being acceptable. 
 And if cleaning
 up was done regularly, perhaps that could fall under
 contributions of time [...] maintaining the Space's
 Who else has thoughts/comments?
 -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
 Davis Makerspace Discuss mailing list
 Discuss at lists.davismakerspace.org

More information about the Discuss mailing list