Weed torch left out ; room 4 unlocked

Came in to water plants tonight and saw this left out:

Went to move it into room 4 for safe keeping and found room 4s door to the courtyard unlatched. Just fyi to doublecheck things.


Reading the heading, totally thought you meant something else.


It could work double duty but i don’t think it’d be safe.


This door to the garden is getting pretty frequent use which I don’t suspect is going to go away, at least not seasonally, and especially as Room 4 is mostly cleared out and will become a more popular place for members to be as we bring the room online for regular use.

I wonder if it would be a good candidate for an electronic lock and badge reader? Perhaps even a security camera? What do you folks at @Security and/or @IT think? The main door reader seems to be reasonably stable. Is it time to try building out a second one?


I have a box of parts for a second reader. There are software changes needed for multi reader/alarm interaction. The second reader is the hard one.

Someone would need to look at the door hardware to see what type of door strike will fit.


I’m going to guess the reason that door is often left unlatched is because, for obvious reasons, you can’t latch it from the outside. Lots of people park in the garden area and leave without going through the main building again. There’s no mechanism to open the door from the outside, and I’m guilty of just making sure the door is fully closed and not latching it. Long term, I would love to see a badge system for that door. In the short them, we should all try our best to leave through the main entrance and make sure the latch is in place. But again, a fully closed door is just as safe in terms of outside security measures…


Any chance we could convert that door for access control with a badge reader?

1 Like

Here comes the dead horse…

If people were actually walking the building when setting the alarm, this, like open windows, would be much less of an issue.

1 Like

But they obviously arent and this is a continued problem with an easy solution with access control.

Plus it would be nice not to have to put a brick in the door when we are out at the garden area.


Speaking from a security standpoint, there is never a time the building should be left empty with an unlatched door for any reason, even if it means walking around the building to latch it. We cannot leave $100,000+ in equipment unsecured, ever. If for no other reason, our insurance company would (will) freak out and make loss claims a nightmare.


I would say if people can’t be bothered to lock the door, then the use of a brick to prop the door open should be prohibited.


I understand the need to have the doors and windows locked but it really gets under my skin that the ‘answer’ is for the last sucker leaving the building to take care of the failings of the original offender.

Does everyone throwing the blame on the “last one out” walk thru their home to check every door and window prior to leaving? Any time I find something that wasn’t up to expectation at home I take the issue up with the family member that created the issue.

I understand this isn’t an easy issue to resolve as there are probably several folks not locking up (versus one recidivist) but I personally don’t see the answer being an arbitrary member being on the hook resolving the problem. Granted, I don’t have $100,000+ in possessions in my house.

(Stepping off the soapbox and waiting for the shunning to begin.)


I’m wondering how the software in one reader could possibly need to be changed due to the presence of another reader.

Isn’t it a simple output to the alarm system? And isn’t the alarm system agnostic as far as the source of the signal is concerned?

The logging may need to be altered, but even there it’s a minor change.

[Edit] Doesn’t the MCP already have a second way to unlock the door?

The central mcp program is only a webservice that talks to WA. It does not interface with the alarm directly.

That is currently being done by the main door reader. So we need to change things.

The mcp is a reimplemptation and needs some work. It does not work exactly as the last version that was at douglas.

If anyone wants to go into things in more detail please message @IT and we can set up a time.