Inhaltsverzeichnis
2021-12-01
Anwesenheit
lux, spacekookie, yuka, nikky, nest, multi, stephie, bibor, codezero, hexchen, ralisi, yrrsinn, zotan, gyrosgeier, mitch
TOP1: Lux & Yuka music
- kookie donated their old NAS running on core.lan
- Synchronised MPD setup with snapcast
- A cable exists on the shelves behind the antifa flag to plug phones / playback devices into
- Documentation in the wiki
TOP2: Bibor's email
- Point #1 of the e-mail
- Last plenum discussed problems with opening up the space regularly again
- Another problem: different parts of the community don't know each other
- From a community-building perspective this is kinda sad (and got worse with covid)
- A trust problem: it's hard to trust everyone in the space if you don't know them
- Problem solving becomes hard when we don't know/ trust each other
- Point #2 of the e-mail
- Who are current key members? How and when do we revoke keys?
- Idea: revoke access, and re-build access based on rules
- People who come regularly have keys
- People who come once a year might not need one
- Plenum decides?
- This requires personal availability at the plenum
- Lux: someone who has a key should be part of the plenum structure
- If we revoke keys we need to very quickly re-issue keys
- Keep track of who has keys now and don't revoke en-mass
- Hexchen: Mark all keys for revocation with 3 months timeout
- Kookie: key revocation good, regular key-debounce bad. Who is going to enforce this?
- Why do we need more bureaucracy?
- We need trust and we need people to know how to act in the space, not regulations that need to be enforced.
- Zotan: reasonable distance?
- In Berlin several times a month, but lives 300km away. Does this disqualify them from a key?
- Bibor: probably that's fine. This is a conversation we need to have
- "Reasonable" is a very vague term
- Hexchen: In muccc key requesters need to be known by the community
- being proposed by another person or coming to plenums
- but not strictly enforced in every case
- Yrrsinn:
- We have had key revocations before. Bureaucracy needs to be enforced and is hard
- Key request is a good incentive to come to plenums
- Plenums are a good place to build the community
- Suggestion: every 12 months we revoke keys
- Bibor:
- Not a fan of regular revocation will result in chaos, so probably not feasible
- This round will result in chaos
- Agrees with Hexchen: no hard requirements
- Important: plenum has to agree that you get a key. This ensures that the person is trusted
- Additionally: this is a list of criteria the plenum should think about
- Lux: summarise a few things
- Convinced we won't be able to enforce a yearly reset
- Likes idea the plenum hands out keys
- Maybe add more plenums on a different week day
- One-time reset will produce chaos and we need to think about how to deal with this
- Kookie:
- Generally a good idea that the plenum hands out keys
- Questions: If you're part of a plenum, would you actually reject people?
- Is there going to be a vote? Are you going to argue about it? […]
- The plenum shouldn't decide (accept|reject)
- Regular key revocations would be a bit of a nightmare, should be avoided
- Steph:
- There should be a way to revoke keys individually on a technical level
- Needed to make the key system sustainable
- Ralisi:
- Proposing liberal ways of handing out keys (not against it)
- Will we end up in the same situation as we are now?
- How are we handing out keys currently. Kookie: we're not
- Hexchen:
- Idea from Edinburgh: to get a key N number of existing key members have to propose you to get a key
- Builds a web of trust without liberally giving out keys
- Don't have to vote at a Plenum
- Yrrsinn:
- Plenum definitely shouldn't decide about a person
- Existing key members vouching for new key members should be enough
- Still a fan of yearly revocations (key harvest festival)
- "San Francisco is over"
- Bibor:
- Key-vouching idea is great
- Does 2 things: establish web of trust and plenum can associate a face with a key
- Nikky: If we do we even bootstrap a regular reset?
- Yearly key-harvest festival
- Key bootstrap is relevant whether we do one or we expire them
- One suggestion for a reset:
- Everyone at this plenum keeps
- Separate technical from social problem
- Lux(Summary): we appear to have consensus
- Give out new keys by having 2 vouching key-members
- Also let them introduce themselves at a plenum
- Lux: do we want to revoke keys? And if so, how?
- Kookie:
- Wait until next plenum to revoke keys
- We should also try to figure out a way to decentralise this process
- Lux:
- We need a way to bootstrap the new key system
- But physical keyholders shouldn't turn into starting point of new key system
- Bibor (recap):
- Key revokation ok
- New procedure to hand out key
- Two existing key holders people vouch for new key holders (on a plenum? on the mailing list?)
- Person shows up at plenum and says hi
- We haven't agreed on the bootstrapping process yet
- One-time bootstrap would give anyone now having a key keeping their key
- Lux, spacekookie, yuka, gyrosgeier, bibor, yrrsinn, mitch, codezero
- Repeated re-bootstrap process is to be determined (also do we want this even?)
- Question: what about people who have a physical key but aren't on this list?
- Action Item - Vorstand
- Find out a way to find out who has physical keys
- Action Item - "New Key Issueing Act" group:
- Bibor, spacekookie, hexchen will draft the rules and announce the policy
- Action Item - find out technical details of key system
- spacekookie and hexchen will find out how the system works
- Pres ent information at the next plenum
TOP3: physical presence during the pandemic
- We can't check tests but we can check the vaccine certs
- Rule idea: everyone in the afra is entitled to check all vaccine certificates of everyone present
- Is this something people at the afra can agree on?
- Yuka: change request everyone present can ask a key-holders to check the cert
- Certs can leak sensitive information
- Not everyone should have the right to do that
- Reason for key-holders doing this is that there is additional responsibilities
- Codezero:
- Not sure whether we can legally not checking certs
- Lux:
- The AfRA doesn't fall under any of the categories as long as we don't organise events!
- So we don't have to check vaccine certificates
- Yrrsinn:
- Assumption based on: AfRA is not open and only members can come here.
- Thus the AfRA is not a public spacec
- But: this is all complicated and none of us are lawyers
- Bibor: self tests are extremely unreliable and not a layer of security
- Yrrsinn:
- Rule at the office: if you show any symptoms of the flu, don't come into the AfRA
- Zotan: All rapid anti-gen tests are unreliable
- Lux:
- if you felt sick recently stay away for a few days (or have a PCR test)
- technically if you have a red CWA tile you can get a free PCR test
- Decision consensus: Key holders can be asked to check vaccine certificates
TOP4: MORE PLENUMS
- Maybe have more than 1 plenum a month
- Have the second day rotate so it's not just Wednesday
- More smaller plenums
- What we currently have works, but we can add something on top of it
- Opinion poll shows consensus
- Action Item: Lux and Yrrsinn will go away and present a new plan next plenum
TOP5: RC3 and chill planning
- Have an RC3 experience at the AfRA with bean bags
- Run this as a 4-day event
- We shouldn't announce this anywhere
- Gyrosgeier suggests we make it dependent on the COVID situation
- The plenum trusts Gyrosgeier to make the correct choice about organising this