3,430
edits
Changes
From Pumping Station One
User talk:Hef/Vote on Property Protection Policies (view source)
Revision as of 04:38, 18 June 2018
, 04:38, 18 June 2018no edit summary
== TODO ==
* add a liability waiver that PS:One is not responsible for damage to property used at the space.
* Change his or her to They/Their
* Add notes heavily suggesting that property in use at PS:One for an extended length of time receive an equipment page and a label
* Add language to indicate that PS:One is still able to remove property under tidy space
* Add expectation on property owners for handling property removal from the organization.
** include notification to the membership
** include timetable expectations, but allow for extenuating circumstances
* Add text that indicates that an owner may reclaim an item after it has been tidy spaced if the item is still retrievable. If the item has been disposed of, and retrieving it is not feasible, the organization is not responsible for reimbursement, repairs, etc.
* Add text indicating that all items are subject to tidy space
* Clean up this paragraph and add it to the language
<blockquote>
As for restricting access, there are several reasons:
* A property owner may want to ensure that sufficient training is taking place
* The member may be using the tool or service in an abusive, damaging, or unsafe way, and needs their access revoked
* Their may be multiple tiers of maintenance, where the highest levels of maintenance are only perform able by the property owner, or by a select few the property owner has selected.
I'd treat the bullying case and harassment cases similar to any other fundamental disagreement on usage. That is, If the property owner insists on too high a level of training or over restricts utilization in any way, have the owner take the item home. If the owner doesn't do it willingly, apply tidy space to have the item removed from the space.
a case that come to mind outside of harassment and bullying are that the owner insists on a training level for authorization that an area hosts feels is too high, and that the space can purchase similar equipment and apply more approachable authorization
I also feel that in cases of bullying and harassment, there are repercussions available for violating the membership agreement, and would encourage anyone that feels bullied or harassed to pursue them.
</blockquote>
== Specific comments to address ==
* What makes a project a community contribution vs a loan to the space vs a pure personal project?
* What makes a project a community contribution vs a loan to the space vs a pure personal project?
** I believe this would be the intent of the project/property owner. I don't see a significant difference between "loan to the space" and "pure personal project". In all cases, without proper paperwork, the property is not a community contribution, and should be regarding as such taking the associated risks into account. Basically, don't use it if you need to own it and don't own it. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 14:04, 17 June 2018 (CDT)
** I believe this would be the intent of the project/property owner. I don't see a significant difference between "loan to the space" and "pure personal project". In all cases, without proper paperwork, the property is not a community contribution, and should be regarding as such taking the associated risks into account. Basically, don't use it if you need to own it and don't own it. --[[User:Hef|Hef]] ([[User talk:Hef|talk]]) 14:04, 17 June 2018 (CDT)
