[PLUG-TALK] Out of Eden

Aaron Burt aaron at bavariati.org
Wed Sep 28 23:59:08 UTC 2011


(sorry, long blather, ignore as necessary)

I love nice freewheeling open-membership groups.  You usually get a bunch
of bright folks from similar backgrounds who operate on a handful of
(mostly unspoken) ground rules, many as old as the Enlightenment.

The rules aren't the point of the group, they just facilitate collaboration
and mutual help, toward the group's goals (and fun often comes first.)

But I've seen a few nice groups get chewed on and damaged by some Black Hat
who acts sorta like a member, but breaks the rules.  BH might be a troll, a
criminal, mentally ill, or just plain mean - doesn't matter.

The major damage usually comes not from Black Hat, but from the reactions.
Everyone knows who the Black Hat is, but nobody wants to just kick him out,
because you can't just DO that, y'know?

First, the group invents explicit rules and puts them in everyone's face,
which makes things seem a lot less freewheeling and fun. Black Hat just
ignores them anyway.

Then the group tries to apply social pressure on Black Hat to conform.
Black Hat squeals about freedom and rights and valuing differences, which
makes everyone feel queasy and evil. Black Hat just ignores it anyway.

At this point, the group leaves Black Hat alone for a while, hoping BH will
get bored and go away, or magically gestate into a White Hat, or something.
BH usually has no reason to leave (or change) though.

Eventually, Black Hat does something inexcusible, or folks just get tired
of his blackhattery, and the Membership thing starts.  Open-membership
groups, by nature, don't exclude people.  So trying to exclude someone can
spark an identity crisis that can tear groups apart.

It usually starts with "well, we're open, but there's qualifications..."
But the qualifications exclude some Nice Folks, and besides, they seem
kinda arbitrary.  And the Black Hat ignores them anyway.

Eventually, membership somehow gets formalized enough that Black Hat's
membership can be revoked.  And then it's no longer an open-membership
group.  Things don't seem as fun and open anymore.  And new members don't
join up so much.

I remember one Black Hat at FreeGeek, who only stopped being a hassle when
he went to prison.  Wonder if he's out yet?

I'm not proposing this for PLUG, but...
There are many reasons for the formally-organized style of group, with
annual dues, elected officers and organized meetings.  One reason is that
it raises a barrier to gadflies and Black Hats.  (Others include:
accountability for club assets, organization of longer-term projects,
leadership succession, and most importantly, a budget for beer and donuts.)

If I held the pdxlinux.org domain and ran the PLUG email servers, I'd just
"trespass" anyone I regarded as a Black Hat.  Like any prudent party host,
blogger or business, you may let anyone in, and err on the side of
tolerance, but ultimately, you get to (and have to) choose your guests.

Nothing to do with membership, or identity, or anything else.  Just kicking
out the guy at the party who drinks all the beer and starts fights.

But I'm kind of a jerk anyways,
  Aaron



More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list