Fri 13 Sep 2013 11:58PM

How Do We Define the Boundaries of TBANZ?

DS Danyl Strype Public Seen by 60

On the discussion about whether to use Loomio as a formal decision-making tool for TBANZ, Richard Brown wrote:

"Perhaps Emma will confirm my observation that timebanks around the world are as different as people are. I understand and see the wisdom of a bottom-up approach. I guess a question we can ask now is how can we (TBANZ, timebank.org.nz, loomio.timebank, skype.timebank, myself, coordinators, and others) serve and help those wanting to faciltate timebanking or participate in timebanking? What resources, knowledge, experiences, friendship and mentoring can we bring or contribute? Can we be open to all the different flavours? For example accepting of those not using 1==1 or different business models or their own restatement of their values or using different systems? Those using their own definitions of inclusion and membership criteria, etc? Maybe we all can agree for a start on a NZ flavoured statement of our Kiwi core values without being too prescriptive? That we are all timebankers if we agree to a basic premise of reciprocal service exchange and community service and inclusion.?"

Unfortunately Richard appears to have vanished, and last time I checked his freecycle-style time exchange website is no longer operating, but the questions he asked might be a good start for a discussion about how TBANZ can be as inclusive as possible, while still being coherent and clear about our kaupapa.


Sarah Rogers Sat 14 Sep 2013 6:53AM

I thought this was something we already discussed at the hui last year? That our core values were the 1=1 thing and the five core values as stated by Edgar Cahn?


Rebecca Ranum Sat 14 Sep 2013 9:47PM

Maybe a good discussion to revist at the up coming hui and see if we are all still in the same place or if things have evolved.


Miles Thompson Sun 15 Sep 2013 10:44PM

Kinda with Sarah on this I thought we already discussed this at last hui decided the core values we think are required for something to be called 'a timebank' as ratified here https://www.loomio.org/discussions/1361

It may well makes sense to have associations maybe collaborate etc with other ideas that are 'timebank' like but personally I think for timebanking to be a success in NZ we want people to know that if its using the name 'timebank' at least those minimum core values are in place.. so people can say 'oh yeah, timebanking, i did that in Wanganui, I'll join my local one'.


Hannah Mackintosh Sun 15 Sep 2013 10:56PM

The 1=1 and the 5 core principles already do a pretty good job of setting a clear kaupapa but allowing individual timebanks to evolve in their own flavour.


Benedict McHugo Mon 16 Sep 2013 7:09AM

We did decide as a group that, at that time, we wanted the five core principals & 1hr=1hr.

Something I have learnt on my TB journey is that it is not unhealthy to re-visit decisions, people change, groups grow and evolve. As long as those decisions are not sprung on people (time to ruminate) they are usually the correct ones for that particular time.
OTB does allow trade for things e.g 3kg bag of lemons for 1 hr. Personally drives me crazy with disharmony/complaints but allows some of our older members to trade but its why were here, to facilitate trades.


Miles Thompson Tue 17 Sep 2013 11:38PM

Hmmm interesting.. we technically allow people to trade hours for stuff at Kapiti timebank too though its not the core of things.. guess we decided in the end why make things difficult and if the person receiving the 'thing' is pledging 1 hour of their time, as long as they are happy that their time is valued same as everyone else you're still conforming to 1=1 - but a tricky one no doubt.


Lyttelton TimeBank Mon 7 Oct 2013 11:50PM

At Lyttelton TimeBank we abide by the 1:1 philosophy for time. For objects we say one credit per trade. Borrow a shovel for the day, give 1 credit. Drop off a donation at the Garage Sale, receive 1 credit. While we don't close our doors to new ideas, having a basic vision or mission, keeps us all going in the same direction. I agree with the above, we have already decided that 1:1 and 5 core principles is a TimeBank, so let's stick with what we are, that is why we are here. I think if you have a very different philosophy then it should have a different name.


Danyl Strype Wed 5 Feb 2014 5:03PM

Thanks for your comments everyone. I wasn't proposing to change the kaupapa though (although Richard was). What I was asking was how can TBANZ can be as inclusive as possible, while still being coherent and clear about our kaupapa?

One example is the work that Miles is doing on Good Good Wonderful. This allows for a sort of integration between TimeBanks and other forms of favour economy. If Richard's site was still around, he would be able to hook into the wider network created by GGW.

One point Richard raises which I think is worth being wary of, considering some of the stories Ruth from the UK told us, is the careerization of TBs by groups who are more interested in using fashionable buzzwords to suck up public funding than in serving communities. Having something in kaupapa around TB administrations (both governance and paid staff) being accountable to their memberships would be good to see.


Miles Thompson Wed 19 Feb 2014 3:15AM

some way of saying that Timebanking requires that you actually trade hours (rather than just say that you are all about exchanging hours without writing anything down) seems to me would be one way to avoid the idea timebanking from being watered down (as perhaps has occured in the UK) through the process of, as you describe it, the 'careerization of TBs by groups who are more interested in using fashionable buzzwords to suck up public funding than in serving communities'.

In terms of groups like good good wonderful I think it is appropriate an OK that something like ggw would not be able to describe itself as 'timebanking' per se. not that its not also a good thing.. what i would care about most of all is the idea that people know what they are getting if they join a timebank, really.