search

NottingHack / rules

Hackspace Rules
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
4 stars 17 forks source link

Insurance Policy Obligations #26

Closed rlp10 closed 8 years ago

rlp10 commented 8 years ago

Further to the discussion in issue #24, do the obligations of the Hackspace to its insurer require any other additions or amendments to the rules? Perhaps someone (me?) can read through and see if there are other duties which should be made clear to the members in the rules.

It would be regrettable if a member were to breach the terms of our insurance because we hadn't properly made clear our obligations to the insurer in the rules.

sid351 commented 8 years ago

I think it's also useful to mention where an existing rule is based on, if not there outright because of, a clause in our insurance policy. On 6 Jan 2016 17:35, "rlp10" notifications@github.com wrote:

Further to the discussion in issue #24 https://github.com/NottingHack/rules/issues/24, do the obligations of the Hackspace to its insurer require any other additions or amendments to the rules? Perhaps someone (me?) can read through and see if there are other duties which should be made clear to the members in the rules

It would be regrettable if a member were to breach the terms of our insurance because we hadn't properly made clear our obligations to the insurer in the rules

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/NottingHack/rules/issues/26.

rlp10 commented 8 years ago

That's fine, provided we don't give the impression that its not a rule to take seriously. See my comments in the fourth paragraph here: https://github.com/NottingHack/rules/issues/24#issuecomment-169397553

geeksareforlife commented 8 years ago

I'd rather we didn't mention the insurance too much, as per @rlp10 point.

I am happy for people to see the current insurance documents, but they expire at the end of this month and we will get new ones, although probably not too much!

geeksareforlife commented 8 years ago

Documents are available here:

https://wiki.nottinghack.org.uk/wiki/Insurance

sid351 commented 8 years ago

My thinking was that by making it clear that the rule ties directly in to the insurance of the space it immediately justifies it as a rule.

...Kind of the opposite to seeing it as a rule for the sake of it I suppose. It also rationalises the rule pretty quickly. On 7 Jan 2016 15:07, "James Hayward" notifications@github.com wrote:

Documents are available here:

https://wiki.nottinghack.org.uk/wiki/Insurance

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/NottingHack/rules/issues/26#issuecomment-169688823.

geeksareforlife commented 8 years ago

I don't mind us putting things in purely because of the insurance, or even discussing it here, but if we put that as the reason inside the rules then people will ignore it

dpslwk commented 8 years ago

Is sooner not reference anything very specific in the insurance docs as they may be changes each year if we shift insurer

'RepRap' Matt

On 7 Jan 2016, at 16:30, Owen B notifications@github.com wrote:

My thinking was that by making it clear that the rule ties directly in to the insurance of the space it immediately justifies it as a rule.

...Kind of the opposite to seeing it as a rule for the sake of it I suppose. It also rationalises the rule pretty quickly. On 7 Jan 2016 15:07, "James Hayward" notifications@github.com wrote:

Documents are available here:

https://wiki.nottinghack.org.uk/wiki/Insurance

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/NottingHack/rules/issues/26#issuecomment-169688823.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

rlp10 commented 8 years ago

So perhaps we can close this issue on the basis that we will look at the new insurance documents once they're available?