I wasn’t there to hear what officers said or have intimate knowledge of our call outs/lease provisions related to that. I do know that law enforcement can close a business for recurrent crime and public intox/disorderly conduct is actionable.
1 Like
Was there an incident that made this an emergency. Please don’t mistake concern with the procedure as disagreeing with the rule.
4 Likes
Why was this done as a special meeting? I think there should be a Bylaw in place to prevent rules from being made without the membership being involved. Talk is not the membership.
3 Likes
I don’t even disagree that a rule of this type is necessary.
I just don’t think that it was an emergency that required a closed, secret, unscheduled meeting, without input about an agenda item from the membership. I think it sets bad precedent.
Ken’s assertion about cops being called 20 times is a red herring. The cops were not called 20 times about people drinking. or using drugs. The cops were called about a variety of things, including at least two times where it was a vendetta against a particular member.
5 Likes
Anyone ever conceive that maybe something happened that maybe isn’t everyone’s business but was bad enough that the BoD took a step towards making a hard decision that they knew people were not going to like the “optics” of but they decided that being adults and taking the correct steps overrode any “bad optics” that might occur?
The only bad optics here is overt trolling.
10 Likes
In that case you’d be talking about a single incident so major that everyone would know about it anyway or small enough that it doesn’t require a blanket rule.
Making rules because of supposed “secret” incidents doesn’t make things look any better.
3 Likes
I think rules should not be put in place until the actual wording been reviewed by the membership. We got into this with the bylaws discussion group. This should apply to DMS wide rules as well. This way we can have a number of eyes making the rule clearer and make certain the rules do not interfere negatively on other rules.
2 Likes
If an incident lead to an emergency ruling I don’t think itll be secret since one would expect it to also lead to a suspension or expulsion
That was sort of my point. A single incident big enough for a rule wouldn’t be a secret and the converse: An incident minor enough that it can remain secret doesn’t justify such a sweeping rule, a rule covering even the parking lot, a multitenant area which we don’t own or have exclusive control over.
All of my comments, but the way, based on the hypothetical “secret incident” mentioned earlier. I don’t actually know if there was secret incident because… secret.
2 Likes
We shouldn’t be making rules that are outside the scope of the makerspace. For example, you mention the parking lot. There are other laws that cover what happens inside your own vehicle being like your home. I am not at all certain how those laws in combination with this new rule can work together. Can they for example ban you for doing something in your own home? I know your vehicle is covered under some of this. I am not a lawyer but it seems to me that it might run afoul.
It might just cover what happens outside your vehicle and actually in the parking lot.
1 Like
well that just gives the air of being wishey-washy doesn’t it? You want to make a rule - get it out there where people can debate it, give comment or advise. That’s how you get buy in. Otherwise were back to where many said where we were before - secret meetings, over stepping authority, etc., etc… This isn’t leadership, it’s dictatorship. Or is that dictatorocracy?
Like I said, I don’t have any problem with the rule, just the lack of member participation. 'nuf said from me. Others can chime in - that is unless you all have another unannounced meeting to make a rule that says they can’t.
4 Likes
We expelled a member over threats of violence that involve mentions of drugs.
We also have video of people drinking at the space both indoors and outdoors.
The issue was reported publicly by a member on the record. If we did not enact a rule and anything happened DMS could be liable. We chose the responsible path an enacted the rule.
To go back to Stan’s point though, we have had what seems like a lot of special meetings, not just this vote.
As our term progresses I hope to see the number of meetings required decline as the current priorities are stabilized.
9 Likes
No idea. In an employment situation an employer could fire you for booze in such a situation but not for a firearm. Is DMS membership the same sort of “at-will” relationship where anything goes unless prohibited by law? Perhaps. I’m not a lawyer.
Well in that case, threats of violence would be the offense. Talking about drugs is legal and doesn’t violate any DMS rules.
Video of people drinking? Say it ain’t so! There is no counting the number of people who have cracked open a beer at the space. Your mention of video makes it sound so sinister, but it wasn’t against the rules. Glad you caught ‘em, though!
3 Likes
This is not anything that you should be surprised at, we have had meetings called “Beer and Bitch” for months now. It is not a reason to ban it.
Yes, there was one incident that mentioned drugs that are ALREADY ILLEGAL and already against the rules. We are talking about making rules against legal things here. EDIT: talking about it is not against the rules or illegal
It seems to be that ya’ll are just making CYA rules with no real incidents involving alcohol and without membership wide comment. It seems alot like the last group. I expected better.
If this was a wide spread issue then perhaps it might be something to worry about. I think ya’ll have much more important things than shoving another rule on to people that has no real need.
4 Likes
declaring “alcohol” to be forbidden was VERY poorly thought out. You’ve already killed one class, and there will now be no way to clean the print beds in 3D nor solder rosen residue in the E-lab.
And urgent fix is needed to address those. There was no emergency. There is now.
4 Likes
You are using ethanol to clean the bed? Why not isopropyl? It’s not an intoxicant…hence completely allowed…
Actually, it is shocking.
A blanket prohibition on “alcohol” covers some things that are NOT part of any problem at the space.
Bad rule. Fix it.
3 Likes
It says “alcohol”. Not a specific type.
1 Like
It also says intoxicating substances…
1 Like