Wed 4 Nov 2015 7:25PM

What sub-groups or "committees" shall we create?

LF Luke Flegg Public Seen by 242

...and how exactly do we devolve decision making power to them?
(so we don't require ALL of CTF to vote on EVERY little decision?)

eg. Admin group are devolved power to vote on certain expenses, without having to wait for everyone (even those who have chosen not to be part of the Admin group) to vote FOR a proposal to cover the cost of an event/purchase/etc.



Alex Chozabu P-B Sat 7 Nov 2015 3:31PM

I don't think we should create any in advance - but as we need them, when the "main" group gets busy.


Luke Flegg Wed 11 Nov 2015 12:51AM

Indeed. But I made this "discussion topic" as the place for creating committees & devolving clear powers & responsibilities to them in a simple, democratic way.


Poll Created Wed 11 Nov 2015 12:57AM

Let's use 'sub groups' for committees? Closed Sat 14 Nov 2015 12:07AM

Seems to be a smart way of doing things!
Still use this discussion topic (which inside the "main" CTF decisions group) for creating/defining the committees (we only need a handful right?)


Results Option % of points Voters
Agree 100.0% 4 LF SP SH JT
Abstain 0.0% 0  
Disagree 0.0% 0  
Block 0.0% 0  
Undecided 0% 10 ACP DH LS TD CBS DU BF GM LG LKF

4 of 14 people have participated (28%)


Luke Flegg
Wed 11 Nov 2015 12:58AM

It's neat. What's the alternative? I can't see any other neat way to keep "admin" or "tech" or "money" decision makers separate from everyone else (if that's what's desired by everyone)


Jem Tyler
Fri 13 Nov 2015 1:35AM

If I understood this better then I would know whether to either agree or disagree.


Jem Tyler
Fri 13 Nov 2015 1:48AM

If I understood this better then I would know whether to either agree or disagree.


sarah hopkins
Fri 13 Nov 2015 11:05AM

Sounds good to me


Greg Madison Wed 11 Nov 2015 7:54AM

I didn't see this proposal a week ago - was it posted in the main CTF group? Must have missed it. I see Luke's desire for neat presentation of sub-groups' decision-making on Loomio. My issue with it is that if decision-making to delegated to a sub-group we re-create the same hierarchies that all groups create. And decisions start being made in a way that is not transparent to the whole group any more. Can I suggest that sub-groups are formed, for 'tech' if that is needed? and 'admin' (includes money). But that someone from each group remains responsible for informing the whole CTF group of what is happening in the group? Can someone from the main group 'block' a decision that is about to be made by the admin group, for e.g.? Can anyone join and leave any sub-group at any time? Greg


Luke Flegg Wed 11 Nov 2015 10:40PM

Greg, sure we can avoid the hierarchical structure, but you're a member of the Working Retreat committee no? So where can this committee propose smaller things which don't need to involve those without a particular interest/capacity? You could have a separate Facebook group, but I'd say instead or as well, a separate group on Loomio would be handy do you not think?

Also with you @alexpb ; no point pre-emptively making committees! I just wanted to think ahead how would be the best way to stay close (and transparent) without pulling EVERYone into every discussion, everywhere. Mastering this will make us very clever methinks.


Alex Chozabu P-B Wed 11 Nov 2015 6:55PM

I still think everything should get posted in one place.

When it starts getting too "noisy", or we have a clear, easily explainable need to split up the conversation, we look at how to split it up at that point - but no sooner!

The more "groups" there are, folders, trees and other structures, the harder it is for a newcomer (or even a long-term member) to see what is going on. Also, it's not good to have a bunch of groups/folders with nothing happening in them!

Load More