Start Group Report 2010-03: Difference between revisions
(new page from central) |
No edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
FREEGLE START GROUP<br>31st March 2010<br>46 Members. This Group is open to all Central Members.<br>SUMMARY OF POSTS FROM MESSAGES 750-789<br>Spokesperson: Sue, Walsall | FREEGLE START GROUP<br>31st March 2010<br>46 Members. This Group is open to all Central Members.<br>SUMMARY OF POSTS FROM MESSAGES [http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Growth/message/758 750]-[http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freegle-Growth/message/789 789]<br>Spokesperson: Sue, Walsall | ||
The Start Group were asked by the Group Assessment Team (GAT) to consider further issues which were not specifically covered in the poll. These are the questions, and the conclusions we came to:<br> <br>(a) Is it OK for existing group owners to set up new groups outside their own area but not just for helping out?<br>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. | The Start Group were asked by the Group Assessment Team (GAT) to consider further issues which were not specifically covered in the poll. These are the questions, and the conclusions we came to:<br> <br>(a) Is it OK for existing group owners to set up new groups outside their own area but not just for helping out?<br>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?<br>GAT will look at these indvidually 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.<br>(c) Should we take into account the person applying for a listing, as well as the area they want to cover?<br>Yes, but any known issues with an applicant should be passed to the Reps, not dealt with by GAT. Currently GAT are not passing on details of who the applicants are when we ask for views on an application.<br>(d) What if there is more than one application for a new group in an area?<br>Deal with in strict date order. There were several views on this but this is the simplist option so the one we have gone for as all the others were quite subjective.<br>(e) Should we accept a group opened by someone who also plans to keep their Freecycle group open in the same area?<br>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. | (b) What about groups who expanded their boundaries when they left Freecycle?<br>GAT will look at these indvidually 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.<br>(c) Should we take into account the person applying for a listing, as well as the area they want to cover?<br>Yes, but any known issues with an applicant should be passed to the Reps, not dealt with by GAT. Currently GAT are not passing on details of who the applicants are when we ask for views on an application.<br>(d) What if there is more than one application for a new group in an area?<br>Deal with in strict date order. There were several views on this but this is the simplist option so the one we have gone for as all the others were quite subjective.<br>(e) Should we accept a group opened by someone who also plans to keep their Freecycle group open in the same area?<br>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?<br>Lack of response from owner address, same number of messages a month (i.e. auto messages), less than 10 messages a month.<br>Work on the buddy system for new groups mentioned in the last Start summary has been transferred to the People Working group, where it is well under way, and will soon result in a proposal to the Reps. | (f) What is the definition of an inactive group?<br>Lack of response from owner address, same number of messages a month (i.e. auto messages), less than 10 messages a month.<br>Work on the buddy system for new groups mentioned in the last Start summary has been transferred to the People Working group, where it is well under way, and will soon result in a proposal to the Reps. | ||
We need to 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. | We need to 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. | ||
We also have the following outstanding tasks:<br>- Define procedures for groups leaving or changing ownership<br>- Consider whether to establish a database of mods, including who would have access to such information. | We also have the following outstanding tasks:<br>- Define procedures for groups leaving or changing ownership<br>- Consider whether to establish a database of mods, including who would have access to such information. | ||
If you're interested in these topics, please come and join in. | If you're interested in these topics, please come and join in. | ||
Sue | Sue | ||
Walsall<br> | Walsall<br> | ||
Back to | Back to Freegle Start forward to [[Start Group Report 2010-04]] | ||
[[ | [[Category:Start_Group_Reports]] | ||
Latest revision as of 10:10, 3 December 2019
FREEGLE START GROUP
31st March 2010
46 Members. This Group is open to all Central Members.
SUMMARY OF POSTS FROM MESSAGES 750-789
Spokesperson: Sue, Walsall
The Start Group were asked by the Group Assessment Team (GAT) to consider further issues which were not specifically covered in the poll. These are the questions, and the conclusions we came to:
(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 indvidually 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?
Yes, but any known issues with an applicant should be passed to the Reps, not dealt with by GAT. Currently GAT are not passing on details of who the applicants are when we ask for views on an application.
(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 simplist 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.
Work on the buddy system for new groups mentioned in the last Start summary has been transferred to the People Working group, where it is well under way, and will soon result in a proposal to the Reps.
We need to 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.
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.
If you're interested in these topics, please come and join in.
Sue
Walsall
Back to Freegle Start forward to Start Group Report 2010-04
