This seems like two unrelated proposals: Family dues discounts and Key
access to minors. Perhaps I just misinterpreted formatting.
I couldn't organize my words to reflect my thoughts at the time, but the
idea of 'grandfathering' in a key that hasn't even been approved yet rubs
me the wrong way. I agree that changing the rules after the fact is
unexcellent and as they are written now there are no restrictions on keys
beyond being a member of good standing who has demonstrated
trustworthiness. The discussion surrounding key holders was brought up due
to concerns(that have largely been satisfied). This isn't about
grandfathering. We are making an exception.
Related to approving keys for one minor before instituting an age
requirement with no cause. This suggest one of two scenarios: 1) we don't
trust minors and their guardians to act responsibly but no one wants to be
the one to say no. 2)Somehow we trust this minor and guardians and believe
that no one else could ever be as responsible as they are. That members who
helped start SynHak and their children(should their child want to pursue
membership and keys) could never be as responsible.
Either every minor can be trusted with a key or none can and we have to
force the guardians to go through the appropriate processes. We trust
minors enough to give them full membership status empowering them to vote
on how to spend money and who the board and officers are. They are
even(currently) eligible to run for these positions themselves. So long as
they have proven they can fulfill the requirements as outlined in the
current rules why should they not be granted a key?
I'm not against responsible people having keys. I just want uniform
rules. To that end I have some suggestions for this discussion.
All minors may be assigned keys
Legal guardians must be in the same room as them while operating
power tools, heated tools, or other hazardous tools.
0 Tolerance for both the minor and the guardian in following
this rule.
Consult with insurance: Minors over the age of 14/16 only require a
relative over 25/30?
While I am entirely against the prospect of allowing one minor to have a
key and bar others just because their proposal came up first in the
minutes. I want to make rules that are logical. We aren't creating rules
for just one person. Many of us have expressed interest in outreach to
young hackers and I don't want a feeling of second class membership to
stand in the way of their hacking.
regards,
Andrew L
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Torrie Fischer <[email protected]>wrote:
> As promised, here's the full proposal we decided on last night:
>
> ----8<----
> Membership dues will have the following discount structure:
>
> * Regular rate for the first adult 18 earth years of age and older
> * A minimum of $15/mo for each additional adult 18 earth years of age and
> older
> * A minimum of $5/mo for each additional child younger than 18 earth years
> of
> age
>
> The space rules are amended to include:
>
> * Minors under 18 earth years of age are not permitted to visit SYNHAK
> without
> the supervision of an adult and the permission of their parent/guardian.
>
> Key policy is updated to read:
>
> * Keys are restricted to those with membership before May 1st, 2014, and
> afterwards only adults who are 18 earth years of age and older
> ---->8----
>
> Let me know if this is wrong at all.
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
