Loomio

Working Group and Organizing Circle Governance Processes

Luke Opperman Wed 16 Sep 2026 2:06PMPublicSeen by 47

Context

Clarifying the relationship between Working Groups, Organizing Circle, and the Social.coop membership.

In order to document current practices and establish expectations about communication, decision making, and regular reporting of progress and priorities, the Organizing Circle would like to make more explicit the ongoing processes that support Social.coop’s collective operation.

Most recently in March 2024, we stated (https://wiki.social.coop/wiki/Governance#Decision-making):

Decisions in Social.coop break into strategic and operational.

  • Strategic decisions guide operational decisions and are currently made via a staged proposal process.

  • Operational decisions are taken on via working groups and key role holders, loosely by domain but often modified by capacity.

And the bylaws further explain

Working groups are encouraged to make proposals among themselves to determine consensus and operate within their scope of responsibility, but only proposals passed by the full group may be considered binding for Social.coop. Any member may make a proposal to the full group, though it is encouraged to first discuss matters within the appropriate working group.

The wiki has details on our thought process for making proposals in Loomio: https://wiki.social.coop/wiki/Make_a_proposal

Working Groups as of Sept 2026

Working Group Governance Processes

Working Group Membership

  • Any Social.coop members are invited to volunteer to participate in Working Groups that suit their skills and interest in sharing Social.coop’s collective operational effort.

  • Working Groups should make a proposal in Loomio to add new members, letting the full cooperative membership recognize and affirm an individual’s participation in the responsibilities of that working group.

  • Working Groups should regularly evaluate their current workload and collective capacity and make requests on Loomio for additional member volunteers as needed.

The Organizing Circle comprises delegates from each of the active Working Groups, as well as 2 or more at-large members on a rotating term, currently 2 years, selected by sortition from volunteers.

For Working Groups and the Organizing Circle, it is expected that:

  • Members establish and maintain a regular cadence for meeting.

  • The list of current group members is maintained on the wiki.

  • A list of working priorities is maintained, documented on the wiki and posted to the loomio subgroup when updated, and revisited at least annually.

  • Roles for meeting facilitation, note-taking and communication, and delegate to OC should be equitably shared and rotated as appropriate

  • Meeting notes are kept in a shared folder in Mayfirst Nextcloud.

  • Members participate in asynchronous discussion on Loomio, and as appropriate, Mastodon, Zulip and Matrix.

  • Privileges and permissions to Social.coop services are kept updated as members are added or leave, as relevant to the Working Group’s scope and shared resources.

  • An active member of the group is designated, as specified in the bylaws, to represent the Working Group at Organizing Circle meetings and provide status updates, communicate challenges and coordination needs, and share successes. It would be ideal to have two people -delegate and coordinator- from each Working Group to the OC as schedules permit.

  • A quarterly summary of meeting notes and operational efforts is posted to the appropriate Loomio subgroup.

  • Working groups receive a stipend from the annual budget to distribute among members as decided by the Working Group. Additional budget requests shall be made as proposals in Loomio.

Following any discussion, we will document this on the wiki and continue to hold ourselves accountable to these expectations for documentation and communication.

Stephanie Jo Kent
<span class="translation_missing" title="translation missing: en.poll_proposal_options.looks good">Looks Good</span>
Wed 16 Sep 2026 3:02PM

big time appreciate the modeling -- re transparency of decision-making processes. thank you.

Matt Noyes
<span class="translation_missing" title="translation missing: en.poll_proposal_options.looks good">Looks Good</span>
Wed 16 Sep 2026 3:02PM

This is a good starting point. It describes clearly the current state of organization in terms of the relation between working groups and the organizing circle. Thanks for writing this up! It would be great to do the same for each working group: community, tech, finance, [legal]... Also, an update to our organization/operational map to show the various platforms and tools we use and who does admin and maintenance for each. (Loomio, Mastodon, Meet.Coop, Matrix, Zulip, Git.coop, Bonfire, etc.)

Luke OppermanSat 19 Sep 2026 5:17PM

@Matt Noyes Thanks Matt, I agree on this being part of maintaining a clearer picture of our organizational map - I'll add that platform/maintenance mapping to our OC work list.

Kaitlin
<span class="translation_missing" title="translation missing: en.poll_proposal_options.looks good">Looks Good</span>
Wed 16 Sep 2026 3:02PM

this sounds good my only question is what happens when these things aren't being done.

And I agree with another comment about the secretarial labor involved. It would be good to keep in mind how this kind of labor is gendered and underpaid and undervalued systemically, and how that might show up here in terms of stipends for someone who does all these updates versus tech stipends.

Caitlin Waddick, FWG/OC
<span class="translation_missing" title="translation missing: en.poll_proposal_options.looks good">Looks Good</span>
Wed 16 Sep 2026 3:02PM

social.coop’s wiki site lists current members of working groups.

I like others’ suggestions. We want to match each of the working groups with their various roles and responsibilities and their use or oversight of relevant technologies…

Billy Smith
<span class="translation_missing" title="translation missing: en.poll_proposal_options.could be better">Could Be Better</span>
Mon 21 Sep 2026 7:36AM

Too short of a voting time for most of our members.

Yes, I can see how this would have been useful to have some decisions on, before Sunday's work-group, but with fewer people voting right now, this should be extended.

Tom ResingWed 16 Sep 2026 3:52PM

That would help me too, or link to it if documented elsewhere

AdrianWed 16 Sep 2026 3:53PM

A quarterly summary of meeting notes and operational efforts is posted to the appropriate Loomio subgroup.

Members participate in asynchronous discussion on Loomio, and as appropriate, Mastodon, Zulip and Matrix.

I didn't even know Loomio had subgroups! I'm aware of the social.coop matrix space. What is the Zulip server? Is that open to members of social.coop?

I think more clarity/stronger norms on working group communication would be helpful.

A list of working priorities is maintained, documented on the wiki, and revisited at least annually.

An Annual statement of progress and priorities is posted to the appropriate Loomio subgroup.

I don't know if both of these are necessary; seems to make sense to just have a pinned post in the Loomio subgroup.

Also, sorry if I missed it, but it would be helpful to also standardize how working groups communicate the current roster of members. I see that most working groups (except the community working group and organizing circle?) list their members on their respective wiki pages (e.g., Tech WG)

Luke OppermanSat 19 Sep 2026 5:33PM

@Adrian Thanks, I've edited the writeup with your feedback consolidating those items, and on keeping the member lists updated on the wiki.
Zulip is currently only used for operational Working Group async communication, so it's just mentioned in passing on the Operations wiki page, open-but-invite: "anyone who is interested in the working groups and the nitty gritty of the operations is welcome to ask a working group member for a Zulip invite".

Luke OppermanWed 16 Sep 2026 4:45PM

The current list of Working Groups are here on the wiki: https://wiki.social.coop/wiki/Main_Page#Working_groups but I agree those pages should be linked from this document AND that current group membership ought to be listed & maintained on those pages (as a few of them do now).

Clark C. EvansSat 19 Sep 2026 1:42PM

This is probably unhelpful, but here are thoughts.

Administrative burden tends to inhibit voluntary contribution. Necessary consensus scales with the exercise of organizational power and deviation from precedent. Communication (RACI: Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, or Informed) is important when scope is complex. Maintaining succinct standard operating procedures is important.

Luke OppermanSat 19 Sep 2026 5:10PM

Appreciate the comments - this document was drafted and reviewed by the OC, primarily documenting current practice, in advance of posting it here, apologies I overlooked that detail!

I've extended the poll so it'll be up for a week, and lightly edited the proposal text to clarify those comments I think are already intended here around maintaining clear lists of groups & members.

We (the OC) will discuss the larger questions brought up here around labor & admin burden, but from feedback so far I expect we will update the wiki with this detail to guide current activity and continue to adapt as WG needs change.