How many people from each timebank should be on loomio

Good question, are there any system restrictions before we answer? I know that that when starting a new tb you would want to put most of your enegry into getting underway. Once started and more people become involved its easier to get people to step up. Is a couple of votes per tb reasonable?

I suggest x2 people per 100 members. If under 50 members then x1 person

I like Joy's idea.

One or two of the core group for each TB seems like a good idea to me. Since we have over 400 members, I can't honestly imagine 8 folks that know enough about the running of TBs that could answer. I think it really depends on each TimeBank, and who WANTS to do it.

Coming out of discussion so far, I quite like the idea of..
- up to one person (aka one vote) per timebank, at the point that they feel ready to join loomio.
- up to two people for timebanks having over 100 members (at their discretion) aka Lyttleton, Otaki at the moment..

Perhaps worth noting that new timebanks don't have to join the loomio (though we might encourage them to do so once they are ready) and that once joined, people don't have to vote or comment on every proposal. (They can either implicitly or explicitly or abstain).

Another point to consider is does it need to be a timebank on CW2? or a timebank that adheres to the agreed core values? or any similar timebank or system that operates on an exchange of hours? or any group that operaes on a sharing of skills and resources?

@joybells Yeah interesting question. It's a bit belt and suspenders but we were hoping to answer that question here on the loomio. As I recall the discussion at the Hui the general consensus was that the national group would be made up of any timebanks that commit to the core principles and the 1hr=1credit thing (and so I guess the loom.io members would need to reflect that).

I had suggested that there would be the official list of 'timebanks' maintained in public here http://timebank.org.nz/locate so I guess the aim is that eventually this list and the list of those that accept/act out? the principles would be equivalent.

It's a bit belt and suspenders but I suppose if it ever became something worthy of debate we'd use the decision making through loom.io to help decide where we stand on it. ?

FWIW the notes from the hui have under point 2 of the national collab group "Get one person at least from each of the 26 timebanks and Richard Brown onto
Loomio and work out our methods of making decisions on there." So I guess that's a good starting point for now?

I think that however many people from each timebank who want to be a part of the discussion that happens here, can be a member of loomio. However it might be good to put a restriction on the number of people from each timebank who can then vote on each proposal. Then again, maybe that isn't really necessary either - unless we come up against some problems in the future.

Is there any downside to having more than one or two people from each timebank discussing and voting here?

I think the more people who want to be involved at decision making at a national level the better. I don't believe that having more members of one timebank than others is going to affect decision making because we don't all think the same.

Thinking about longeivity it makes more sense to me to encourage more timebank members to be part of the national direction so that when coordinators get tired or move on there are people who are already trained and experienced there to continue on.

If timebanks themselves are trying to increase public participation, connectedness and diversity across communities, why would we not try to achieve this at a national decision making level as well?