On Perpetual Guests - i3smithsmith/i3smithsmith-tasks GitHub Wiki

This is in response to the Slack message posted here:

There are some people who are making no attempt to become members, but instead are choosing to be perpetual guests.

Conclusions first:

A. Each of us has the Self-authority to host, or not; (to define boundaries, or not; to speak, or not.)

This is the agreement we make (and awareness we claim) by being members at i3.

B. If there is discomfort, know that you are obligated to express yourself to disallow unsafe behavior.

This is our agreement under 'Safety 6': "Members must must not allow unsafe practices."

C. The "guest hosting hand-off process" should be more clearly defined (and enforced [digitalization?]) in order to prevent ambiguity and preserve the 'authority of invitation' to a hosted guest.

Reasoning: I've spoken with JeremyG and I understand the challenge experienced during this interaction. I know and respect JimC, and if he's concerned about safety - the concern is warranted. 🙂

Thank you Jeremy and Jim for expressing that there was a conflict and offering i3 membership an opportunity to improve our process - and 'awareness of available process' to handle these situations.

This was an instance when the hosting member should have been well-received by the guest; to be revoking hosting.

Should that effort fail,

ANY member can (and should, comfortably) express to any guest (or member) "I'm unable to accept how you're using the Space unsafely, and you must leave."

If this is expressed from the guest's host, the guest must receive this message and must leave.

To my knowledge there's no well-defined process for paper-trailing a revocation of a guest sign-in. That said, asking a guest to leave supersedes a guest sign-in. To revoke hosting: "You're no longer my guest, please leave". If it were me, I'd cross out the log and timestamp it.

The acceptability of the removal of a guest who is non-receptive to less- confrontational communication is covered under 'Bylaws - Guests 5':

A [...] guest who behaves 
inappropriately (including but
 not limited to violation of these 
rules or the bylaws) may be asked
 to leave by another member.
[...] 
It may be difficult or uncomfortable
 to ask someone to change their 
behavior
 – please feel free to contact a 
Member Advocate or Board Member.

and also 'Bylaws - Safety 6':

Members must not allow unsafe 
practices by any guest or other 
member.

and 'Bylaws - Guests 3.2, 3.3, 3.4'

[Members hosting are responsible for:]

 3.2 Signing the log with each guest
 
 3.3 Making sure guests understand
 the guidelines under which we operate
 
 3.4 The behavior and safety of the
 guest, in addition to the cleanliness
 and security if the space and its 
 property.

First response; before context was provided beyond the initial message:

Dear Mommy Daddy directors 😄 and membership,

Expressing one's Self to the board/members and (implicitly) requesting guidance is always acceptable. Even when the expression is done in a way that taxes, we can choose to frame the complaint in an ideally healthy way.

I give the benefit-of-the-doubt and most generous interpretation of the words.

A. "There are some people who are making no attempt to become members, but instead are choosing to be perpetual guests."

This is by design.

As it stands, a person can be a guest at i3 somebody signs them in. There are no further constraints on the consideration. "Imagine, Innovate, Inspire" is the metric by which we are able to measure our success, and guests (even perpetual guests) are the exact purpose of i3. Guests are responding to the invitation broadcast by the members of i3.

B. "They are unfairly placing responsibility on others shoulders"

Can you describe exactly what you mean by this? Do you have examples?

C. "placing unfair social burdens on members to take responsibility for their presence."

Can you describe exactly what you mean by this? Do you have examples?

The core of this complaint is: "guest is guesting too much", which is critically antithetical to what i3 is: "Imagine, Innovate, Inspire".

Members come in to host Friday tours on purpose. We literally invite people to come in as guests, as often as they want. So, I empathize with the acute response, because I felt the same emotion - at the idea of: "guests not welcome". Guests are welcome, and if an i3 member states that "(perpetual) guests aren't welcome", then there is a crucial misunderstanding of what i3 is.

(Perpetual) guests are a tremendous boon to the Shared Space. They:

  1. often show up for meetings
  2. express their opinions
  3. prove usability of the tools
  4. prove that i3 is able to succeed, and
  5. shine for all of us. (most importantly)

This is as true for (perpetual) guests as it is for scholarship'd members. This is all by design. It's not a bug; it's literally the entire reason i3 exists.

So when a member expresses "it's a problem that this person is being a guest", it's necessary to understand that expression is directly contrary to the active effort being made by existing membership to invite people to the space.

Guests are invited. Guests are welcome. If that's a problem for you, it's a "problem for you".

⚠️ **GitHub.com Fallback** ⚠️