Jacky at 02:08, 3 December 2019

2019-12-03T02:08:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:08, 3 December 2019
Line 117:		Line 117:


	Back to [[Freegle Start]] or go to next report [[Start Group Report 2010-05]]		Back to Freegle Start or go to next report [[Start Group Report 2010-05]]
	[[Category:Start Group Reports]]		[[Category:Start Group Reports]]

Jacky at 20:12, 26 March 2012

2012-03-26T20:12:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:12, 26 March 2012
Line 4:		Line 4:
	'''Summary for April 2010'''		'''Summary for April 2010'''

	Posts [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-~~Start~~/message/790 790]		Posts [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Growth/message/790 790]
	to [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-~~Start~~/message/1024 1024]		to [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Growth/message/1024 1024]

	No of Members : 52		No of Members : 52

Jacky at 04:56, 29 July 2010

2010-07-29T04:56:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:56, 29 July 2010
Line 117:		Line 117:


	Back to [[Freegle Start]]		Back to [[Freegle Start]] or go to next report [[Start Group Report 2010-05]]
	[[Category:Start Group Reports]]		[[Category:Start Group Reports]]

Jacky at 09:00, 20 July 2010

2010-07-20T09:00:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:00, 20 July 2010
Line 116:		Line 116:
	# Work out what to do about Specialist Freegle groups. The main example is about a possible Scouts group. We need people to join in this discussion so that we can thrash out a proposal.		# Work out what to do about Specialist Freegle groups. The main example is about a possible Scouts group. We need people to join in this discussion so that we can thrash out a proposal.


			Back to [[Freegle Start]]
	[[Category:Start Group Reports]]		[[Category:Start Group Reports]]

Chriscant at 08:12, 14 June 2010

2010-06-14T08:12:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:12, 14 June 2010
Line 2:		Line 2:


	Summary for April		'''Summary for April 2010'''

	Posts [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Start/message/790 790]		Posts [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Start/message/790 790]

Chriscant: Protected "Start Group Report 2010-04": Read Only Group Report ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))

2010-06-14T08:09:19Z

Protected "Start Group Report 2010-04": Read Only Group Report ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))

← Older revision	Revision as of 08:09, 14 June 2010
(No difference)

Chriscant: Created page with 'The Freegle Start Working Group can be found at http://freegle.it/Start Summary for April Posts [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Start/message/790 790] to [http://uk.…'

2010-06-14T08:08:57Z

Created page with 'The Freegle Start Working Group can be found at http://freegle.it/Start Summary for April Posts [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Start/message/790 790] to [http://uk.…'

New page

The Freegle Start Working Group can be found at http://freegle.it/Start

Summary for April

Posts [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Start/message/790 790]
to [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Start/message/1024 1024]

No of Members : 52

Spokesperson : Sue (Walsall)

The points in the last summary were sent to the Reps who approved all our
recommendations except point (c)

(a) Is it OK for existing group owners to set up new groups outside their own
area but not just for helping out?
Yes, in principle, but we don't want empire building so ideally they should be
short term and looking for more local help as soon as possible. Groups should
come from a local requirement for them and Freegle as an organisation never sets
up groups even to fill gaps.

(b) What about groups who expanded their boundaries when they left Freecycle?
GAT will look at these individually and discuss with the group owner/team if it
seems to be a problem when they get new applications for groups in the expanded
area.

(c) Should we take into account the person applying for a listing, as well as
the area they want to cover?
The Team can send cases to the Reps at their discretion, but must have a quorum
to do so".

If the GAT have solid evidence (which is the only type we will take into
account, hearsay evidence should be ignored because it is just that, hearsay)
that an applicant is unsuitable, it won't be necessary to involve the Reps.

The following link is the current draft proposal being discussed on this group
so people please take the time to read through it and let us have your comments
on it.
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AfsQoQeOQu93ZGZudnZjNm5fNjFoajJ2cnJmNw&hl=en

(d) What if there is more than one application for a new group in an area?
Deal with in strict date order. There were several views on this but this is the
simplest option so the one we have gone for as all the others were quite
subjective.

(e) Should we accept a group opened by someone who also plans to keep their
Freecycle group open in the same area?
Yes, because if we don't allow it they may just lie to us - but we should point
out to them that TFN are likely to take a dim view of it. Of course, we would
prefer them to move their FC group to Freegle.

(f) What is the definition of an inactive group?
Lack of response from owner address, same number of messages a month (i.e. auto
messages), less than 10 messages a month.

The Buddy proposal was recently completed by the WG and ratified by the Reps.
The scheme should be up and running in the next few days. Many thanks to Tricia
for setting this up.

The GAT team will now follow these guidelines.
On (C) The group have been asked to elaborate not only on what types of
information should be made available and to whom, but also what should be
considered relevant.

After much discussion the consensus seems to be that the applicants name and
email address should not be supplied to all groups who have an interest. That
all initial groups which the GAT team feel are relevant should be asked it they
feel any others should be consulted.

Any objections to the proposed new group should be listened to, but they need to
be backed up by facts and evidence for the GAT team to be able to act on them.
Territorial objections alone will be insufficient. No one should go looking for
information to discredit a new applicant, and only facts which would be relevant
to owning a Freegle should be considered.

We went on to discuss the possibility of a new dummy group being set up for new
group applicants, so they can practice and see what is involved, and hopefully
weed out earlier, the ones without the commitment necessary to get a group up
and running successfully. It is felt that it may also prevent those that drop
out because they feel they are being ignored, because of the sometimes
considerable time lapse from applying for a group, to GAT being able to consult
everyone necessary.

David (Reading) has offered to get a proposal to the Reps and set up the dummy
group. It is seen as something to run alongside the Buddy scheme and will help
feed them through when and if their group is approved. Or maybe offer them
something else they can help with if it isn't.

We have now agreed that the procedure for getting approval for decisions is:

# Discuss and reach a majority conclusion on group.
# Include it in our summary to Central.
# Give time for any discussion or objections we receive.
# Submit to Reps to either accept, reject, ask for more information or decide it is outside of their remit and we should have a poll.

The Reps have agreed a specialist group for large events such as Glastonbury can
go ahead and supply us with feedback and a possible working model for other
specialist groups. Also we should note that the approval of the Glastonbury
Festival group will not set a precedent for other specialist groups to be set
up.

Paul and Kath are working on the proposed checklist for new groups and the final
proposal will be sent to Start/Reps for ratification.

GAT team guidelines have been updated and will be put on the wiki once proof
read.

We were asked if we had got a list of skills or talents we believe would be
useful specifically for this group. Although this subject has been running on
the Group for a few days, if people have any comments to make or skills to add,
they need to join the Start Working Group.
We also have the following outstanding tasks:
# Define procedures for groups leaving or changing ownership
# Consider whether to establish a database of mods, including who would have access to such information.
# Work out what to do about Specialist Freegle groups. The main example is about a possible Scouts group. We need people to join in this discussion so that we can thrash out a proposal.

[[Category:Start Group Reports]]