Structure Group Report 2012-11-30

STRUCTURE GROUP REPORT

November 2012

http://freegle.it/Structure

wiki link -http://wiki.ilovefreegle.org/Structure_Group_Report_2012-11-30

This is a summary of discussions since our last report of 31st October 2012, covering messages 10729 to 10896. Our membership stands at 76 (the same as last month).

The topics we have discussed this month are below.

Task 93 - Membership List

Following full discussions on this our conclusion is:

Freegle centrally will not use any group's membership list kept by Freegle Direct without permission from the group Volunteers. Volunteers are assumed to be those who receive owner-emails for the group. Permission would be gained by emailing the group -owner address and acted upon with - explicit permission from one Volunteer, and - implicit permission from other Volunteers, i.e. assume consent if no conflicting replies are received within 3 weeks (reminder sent after 2 weeks within that period).

This has been recommended to the Reps.

Paid Moderators

We are discussing the possibility of someone working within an external company (eg. A council, refuse company or a company with a specialised Freegle group running internally) being paid to run or represent a freegle group as part of their job. We are looking for any conflicts of interest and discussing how we would proceed in such situations.

Task 21 - Confidentiality

Re-opening a task which was raised in 2009 but not brought to a close: Consider how confidential items can be discussed v.open democracy.

The question was raised: “The last view in the thread was that confidential discussions should only be held by elected groups, not by self appointed groups. At the time there were no elected groups.

Are people happy that Freegle has evolved nationally to embrace this concept? Do we need to discuss or do anything further? “

We came to the conclusion that confidential discussion should occur only on groups which have at least one elected person on the group. Closed groups must have an elected Observer.

Since we already have a policy that all closed groups have a Rep Observer we are already covering this requirement. Task complete.

Specialist Group Affiliation

Following the Annual Review of Affiliation Processes a discussion has begun about restricted Freegle groups.

We have run two polls.

Poll Questions: Freegle private in-house organisational groups could be set up under the specialist group affiliation processes.

QUESTION 1: Would it be acceptable to proceed affiliation of such a group if a local group does not respond to consultation by GAT?

CHOICES AND RESULTS

- Yes, it is acceptable, 13 votes, 86.67%

- No, it isn't acceptable, 2 votes, 13.33%

- Abstain (please explain on group), 0 votes, 0.00%

- Abandon (please explain on group), 0 votes, 0.00%

QUESTION 2:Would it be acceptable to proceed with affiliation if a local group is, after discussion, against the idea of such a group?

CHOICES AND RESULTS

- Abstain (please explain on group), 2 votes, 14.29%

- Yes, it is acceptable, 2 votes, 14.29%

- No, it isn't acceptable, 10 votes, 71.43%

- Abandon (please explain on group), 0 votes, 0.00%

So, we have a majority view of:

Freegle private in-house organisational groups affiliation: Proposed groups are subject to the same procedures as other specialist group applications. If there is no response from existing groups to consultation by GAT it is acceptable to proceed with the application. If a local group, after discussion, is against affiliation, it is not acceptable to proceed.

The question was then asked: Are there any other special considerations that GAT might have to take into account over affiliation of these types of groups?

Discussion continues...

Trading Arm

The discussion at the AGM seemed to be generally in favour of this, so this group is discussing how to proceed. It has been suggested we:

• Poll on a few questions to get the key principle(s) approved or not.
• Flesh out those principles in more detail.
• Give someone authority to do it - recognising that some of those details may need to change depending on what is possible or practical legally, financially or in terms of time.

Discussion continues...

Reps Elections.

The Returning Officers consulted with the group about some of the procedures involved with the Reps election.

If any of the above topics interest you, or if you have proposals about the structure of Freegle to suggest, please do join our group. http://freegle.it/Structure

Task List

Our Task List can be viewed at http://freegle.it/StructureTasks

The Coordinator for this group is Jacky (Great Yarmouth) Deputy Coordinator is Peter Johnson (Hunts) and Secretary is Wendy (Woodley) Owners are Jacky, Peter and Wendy.

Back to Structure Group Report 2012-10-31, forwards to Structure Group Report 2012-12-31