====== Onboarding Proposals Overview ======

Two proposals were discussed during the onboarding workshop.  
This page lists requirements, facts, advantages and disadvantages of each.

===== Proposal 1 – Four Open Days =====

**Requirements**
  * Attend at least four open days at Hackeriet before applying for access.
  * After that, the board decides on granting access.
  * If the board does not have enough basis for a decision, the board contacts the other members where there is still no bases for a decision the person must attend more open days. 

**Facts**
  * Membership is still granted upon payment and registration.
  * The "four days" rule applies only to access to the space (keys, cards).
  * Decision-making remains with the board.

**Advantages**
  * Clear and transparent: same requirement for everyone.
  * Collective evaluation: several members have the chance to meet the person.
  * Low dependency on individual mentors.
  * Matches the egalitarian principle: equal treatment, no special arrangements.

**Disadvantages**
  * Rigid: "four" is arbitrary, may be too much for some, too little for others.
  * Less personal integration: new members might not get close follow-up.
  * Can be slow for motivated newcomers who want to engage quickly.
  * Responsibility for judgement rests mainly with the board, even if they have not observed the person directly.

===== Proposal 2 – Mentor System =====

**Requirements**
  * When someone shows interest, the board assigns them a mentor from a volunteer list.
  * The mentor introduces the person to Hackeriet.
  * The mentor decides whether the person is suitable, and if so, grants access to the application process.

**Facts**
  * Membership is granted upon payment, as in proposal 1.
  * Access depends on mentor’s evaluation.
  * Mentors must be available and willing to take responsibility.

**Advantages**
  * Personal welcome: newcomers have a dedicated contact person.
  * Faster integration: easier to introduce projects, culture, and routines.
  * Responsibility is delegated, reducing administrative load on the board.
  * Builds stronger community ties: mentors gain ownership of the onboarding.
  * Flexible: allows adjustment to individual circumstances.

**Disadvantages**
  * Uneven practice: different mentors may have different standards.
  * Risk of cliques: access depends on social circles.
  * Requires an active pool of mentors; may strain a few people.
  * Unclear governance: who has the final say, mentor or board?

===== Summary =====

Both models aim to protect trust and culture ("vibe check"), but they solve it differently:
  * **Proposal 1** emphasises collective exposure and consistency.
  * **Proposal 2** emphasises personal guidance and faster inclusion.