Start Group Report 2010-11

Report posted on Central 26th November 2010

November 2010 SUMMARY OF POSTS FROM MESSAGE 1164-1700

This group currently has 62 members, and is open to any member of FreegleUK Central.   Anyone who would like to be involved go to [1] and click on the join button. The spokesperson for this group at present is Sue. (Walsall)

JULY

New Co-Group Owner

Jacqui (Warrington) stepped down as co-owner and was replaced by Wendy (Leicester). It was agreed in future that these appointments should be made more democratic by asking for volunteers and voting if necessary.

Using a platform other than Yahoo Groups

We were asked 'If a group owner wishes to switch from Yahoo to another platform to run their Freegle group, is that OK with Freegle? ' After much discussion, it was unanimously agreed that any group could use any platform they wished. However it was felt mutually beneficial if the Tech Team were consulted in advance

Group merges and splits

If one Freegle group wishes to merge with their neighbour to make one group, or split their group to make two, does that need approval from Freegle? At present there is nothing in place for this eventuality. It is felt that if the overall boundaries were to stay the same, then we could not object. However it would be appreciated if GAT was consulted first.

AUGUST

Consultation on GAT Guidelines and Remit

It was asked why Start group had not been consulted prior to the Group Assessment Team Guidelines & Remit being submitted to Central. The reply was that the group has been so quiet lately and it was felt it required more participation than the group could provide.

Group Leaving Procedures

It was again discussed that we had no procedures for groups leaving Freegle. A document listing the actions to be taken by the Group Launch Coordinator had been prepared and was discussed.

Appointments to GAT

We were asked "Is there a procedure in place for appointing new members to the GAT team?" The subject was broached because Adam (Sheffield) had been enlisted to the GAT team. There was some confusion about what had and had not been decided, or what was in the teams' remit. It was suggested that someone take responsibility for keeping the remit up to date and adding any decisions that would affect it. Wendy (Leicester) agreed to take this task on however it was suggested that all the official records would in future be kept on either the Wiki or on Central. This led to a conversation on accessing the Wiki and finding our way about. It was agreed to tidy it up and remove some redundant links. It was found to have not been updated the last time the GAT remit was amended and Jacky agreed to do it and has now done this. We now require a volunteer who can edit the Wiki to ensure it is kept up to date for Start and GAT changes.

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER

Nuneaton and Bedworth

There was a rather heated discussion started by a new group applicant about their application not being accepted in its entirety. Despite some sympathy for the applicant concerned, it was determined that it was not a suitable topic for Start. The correct procedure is for the applicant to take the case to the appeal panel.

Group Sizes

The discussion about Nuneaton and Bedworth prompted GAT to post the internal guidelines they have been using when assessing new group applications. There was a lot of comment and discussion, but no conclusions.

Long Term Aims for Freegle Groups

We discussed some system for appraising new groups so we could find out what works best to get them going. It was pointed out that the Green Mod school has some unused available resources. It was suggested that once we have some volunteer skills listed perhaps someone could undertake a statistical survey of all groups to find what works where.

Message counts on groups

A discussion then ensued about Yahoo possibly removing the monthly message totals from group front pages and whether the techs could devise something to replace it.

Using a Freecycle group to get members for a Freegle group covering the same area

In view of a recent application we were asked by GAT if we should have another look at the guidelines that allows a Freecycle and Freegle group to be run by the same person in exactly the same area, if the applicant states their intention of using the Freecycle group to gain members for the Freegle group. GAT felt that the method described was potentially underhand and unethical, and demonstrated a lack of commitment to Freegle, when they could have simply changed the group name, as many others have. After lots of input nearly everyone agreed that in this instance it should not be allowed, and that the precedent should be that if a new applicant admitted he/she intended to follow a course which would bring Freegle into disrepute we should refuse it. Many felt we should revisit the question altogether and have a new full poll. However it was found that the original recommendation was made on the Start group and ratified by the Reps, and then communicated to Central. It was agreed that they we would need to make a specific recommendation on a change to the wording of the previously agreed guidelines.

Input from nearby groups on the new group approval process

There was a long discussion about the involvement of surrounding groups making the decisions for approving new groups in their area. Opinions varied between giving them full power to make the decision and remaining as we are at present with a degree of consultation. A spreadsheet was compiled to record the opinions on this topic, but the result was inconclusive this question will have to be revisited in the future before a recommendation can be made.

Local groups also affiliating with other re-use organisations

We were asked if there was any problem with Freegle groups affiliating with another reuse organisation. The consensus was that anyone was free to do this. This question was then turned on its head and we were asked for our views on brand new groups choosing to launch and then affiliate with Freegle. It was discussed and agreed that there was no problem as long as they applied to GAT and were treated like any other applicant.

GAT Reports

There was a discussion on whether GAT reports should remain on Central or go on the Wiki. The wiki being available to non members was felt by some to be an issue. Others felt that putting them there would be a sign of our openness and transparency. On the whole it was agreed they could go on the wiki as long as they are not personalised. For past reports, a compromise has been made, and the reports are listed on the Wiki, but as links to the relevant messages on Central.

Group Leaving Procedures

The group leaving Freegle policy was finalised and was ready to be implemented and uploaded to the Wiki.

NOVEMBER

GAT role/remit etc

Structure group gave us the draft document which outlined the role, remit, appointments procedure etc. of GAT; for our comments and amendments before it is posting on Central. Some changes have had to be made because not everyone understood the structure of the team and its components. This has yet to be finalised.

Back to Start Group Report 2010-05