This feels right in my gut. Starting as simply as we can, slowly progressing to more complexity, when we need to. Let's test and try with a smaller pool of people. Let's get one thing right first :) Then aim for more.

I'm abstaining for this proposal too as I'm happy and motivated to support either and believe neither will cause harm, both will advance us & I also have some concerns re: both competing proposals. I'd support this approach (partly coz RJFP say it's their preference) but also think it'll mean fewer total gigs p/month & might make grant funding (and Gift Aid) harder for us to get because we're almost acting as a fundraising arm of one single charity. Also will require a rebrand when diversify.

Taking this in conjunction with my comment on the other proposition, I am voting to pilot the platform with RJFP supporters to test their appetite.

I agree with this, for the reasons we discussed in the meeting. Seems to make sense to start slow, and as well as possible, with all energy and resources and then learn what works well and what doesn't. Then you can take this knowledge forwards with new ventures.

It could very confusing to the DP brand if it switches to one charity and then later runs a different model. It can be a challenging enough concept to get over: changing the goal posts in a few months or years I sense creates as many problems as it solves. Dealing with the dynamic of various causes involved needs addressing from the outset if that’s to be at the heart of DP. Perhaps a pilot period of 5 or 10 different organisations to learn how to navigate diversity....

1. Can I check by "fundraise for whoever they want" means "fundraise for any 'Planet before profit cause' they want" (or whatever similar wording, because this wording sounds like we would be facilitating our users fundraising for the EDL, which I don't think I'd be happy with.

2. I'm voting abstain partly because I think RJFP want that, and that feels important. But I'm not disagreeing/ blocking because I'm aware some of our potential first users would like to fundraise for other causes

1. Can I check "fundraise for whoever they want" means "fundraise for any 'Planet before profit' they want" because this wording sounds like we'd happily facilitate users fundraising for the EDL, which I don't think I'd be happy with!

2. I'm voting abstain partly because I think RJFP want that, and that feels important. But I'm not disagreeing/ blocking because I'm aware some of our potential first users would like to fundraise for other causes and I think this would mean more gigs happening.

Abstaining is a bit of a cop out , I know. It comes down to a judgment about how active the RJFP supporters are likely to be on the platform and will there be sufficient numbers. I don't think we can know until we test the market.