- TheThinkTank - lists.bikecollectives.org

Political message
by Sarah Schaan 19 Feb '17

19 Feb '17

Greetings everyone! I am curious to know if any bikebike members/organizers have discussed making a collective statement about the recent political issues that USA has been dealing with? Several policies and many statements made by the White House and co. directly contradict our mission statement. As a multinational organization I believe we may have a greater impact if we could unite our voices in some manner. I have been bad at keeping up with social media/ email threads so if this has already been addressed, I would thank you for catching me up! As always, keep your rad souls burning bright :) Sarah Schaan, FMCBW Fargo

9 10

Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions
by Andrew Shooner 15 Feb '17

15 Feb '17

Hi all, Looking for some wisdom on what I think is a pretty deep question for our shop. Quick background: Broke Spoke is a non-profit community bike shop, with a mission to give everyone better access to better bikes, and enable everyone to do their own maintenance. A big part of our community has been a social services campus nearby which includes long-term residency, an overnight shelter, a free cafeteria, and a residential substance abuse rehab program. People from that center use the shop frequently, and are probably the most common group to earn bikes from the shop. Right now, once you regularly commit to a certain number of hours consistently for 4 months, we provide you a key to the shop, so you can come in on your own time to work on your own stuff and free up open shop hours so you can volunteer. This has always been by invitation rather than an automatic 'upgrade'. We have a small group of regular volunteers from the center some of whom would otherwise qualify for this type of access, but have never been invited. We're making an effort this winter to reorganize our shop volunteerism to be more inclusive, and the discussion has led to addressing this. Without speaking for others from the shop, I'll share my own thoughts: on one hand, I hate the notion that someone's general economic status could disqualify them from becoming a more involved member of our community. The other side of that is that severe economic stress or a substance abuse problem can have a serious influence on someone's behavior, and it isn't necessarily an individual character judgement to be more cautious about access to our entire shop (~150 bikes, 8 stands, power tools, etc - our whole operation). But that lands you back in a pretty categorically classist conclusion that poor(er) people are inherently less trustworthy in the shop. I also don't like where that logic leads: where do you draw the line? My gut tells me that the potential benefit in granting someone that trust is worth the risk, but I appreciate the other, more cautious perspective as well. Any thoughts or experiences would be appreciated! Thanks, Andy Broke Spoke, Lexington KY

5 7

Re: [TheThinkTank] Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions (momoko saunders)
by Heather Nugen 15 Feb '17

15 Feb '17

Hey Momoko, This might be better to tackle seperately in a 1-on-1 thread but I think what I'm hearing is that the unclear criteria set it up so that current folks making decisions about new core volunteers are in a position to "judge" incoming members which might dissuade new members. I think that's accurate, but to some extent, we're all judging and being judged all the time (it's not necessarily a bad thing). I think having the criteria be vague and numinous is what makes any process of judgement/evaluation tip towards the unfair/exclusionary. So, what I recommend you all try to do is spend time outlining these a little bit: "Your behaviour in the shop off hours will appropriately represent Bike Farm." - What kind of behavior is appropriate? this doesn't need to be a laundry list, even coming up with 'values' level words (ethical, honest, kind etc) will help people understand what is and is not acceptable. A Bike Farm code of ethics would go a long way towards laying this out (those are usually 1 page or less!) "You have the skills to handle the strange situations that come up at Bike Farm." - what are those skills? Conflict resolution? Desecalation? Loss Prevention? Hands off teaching? - If someone doesn't have them, are there resources Bike Farm knows about/can recommend for folks to learn/practice if they are interested? - is there a way to help interested/incoming folks self assess their skill level with those things and support them in their development/growth? I really think reframing this similarly to the questions of mechanic skills-- and how to evaluate who has and doesn't have them, and how to handle that-- bike co-ops are teaching people all kinds of mechanics all the time, usually in this really awesome, incredibly calm and welcoming non-judgmental kind of way. That's not just haphazard! That's systematized, cultural, and it's usually intentional, and you can apply that kind of teaching philosophy to anything your org/group thinks it's important for people to know. Those questions might seem vague, hard, or weird to answer, but I really think it will make things a lot more accessible and transparent, which in the long run, will make your processes more equitable.

1 0

Re: [TheThinkTank] Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions
by Heather Nugen 15 Feb '17

15 Feb '17

Hey Andrew, it sounds to me like you and your collective might want to consider your criteria for key-holdership. If those criteria are not formalized, expressed, and accessible, then people cannot work towards meeting those criteria, and you have established an elite group of key holders that is inaccessible to the majority of your organizations membership base. That will result in the people who "lead" the organization eventually not being representative of the population your organization (presumably) exists to serve. I don't think that "showing up for x # of hours over x period of time," sounds like it is adequate criteria for someone to be given access, which means there are other (likely currently unstated) criteria that determine whether someone is worthy of the privilege of a key. Rather than ask people to just be more trusting, I would consider doing an activity that names the other criteria (as well as consequences for violating norms), and then make them available generally. This allows people to demonstrate their abilities to meet those criteria-- regardless of income, housing, or addiction history. -Heather On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 4:12 PM, < thethinktank-request(a)lists.bikecollectives.org> wrote: > Send Thethinktank mailing list submissions to > thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank- > bikecollectives.org > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > thethinktank-request(a)lists.bikecollectives.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > thethinktank-owner(a)lists.bikecollectives.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Thethinktank digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions > (Andrew Shooner) > 2. Re: Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions > (momoko saunders) > 3. Re: Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions > (momoko saunders) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Andrew Shooner <ashooner(a)gmail.com> > To: The Think Tank <thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org> > Cc: > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 14:57:27 -0500 > Subject: [TheThinkTank] Big questions about trust, classism, and > preconceptions > Hi all, > > Looking for some wisdom on what I think is a pretty deep question for our > shop. Quick background: Broke Spoke is a non-profit community bike shop, > with a mission to give everyone better access to better bikes, and enable > everyone to do their own maintenance. A big part of our community has been > a social services campus nearby which includes long-term residency, an > overnight shelter, a free cafeteria, and a residential substance abuse > rehab program. People from that center use the shop frequently, and are > probably the most common group to earn bikes from the shop. > > Right now, once you regularly commit to a certain number of hours > consistently for 4 months, we provide you a key to the shop, so you can > come in on your own time to work on your own stuff and free up open shop > hours so you can volunteer. This has always been by invitation rather than > an automatic 'upgrade'. We have a small group of regular volunteers from > the center some of whom would otherwise qualify for this type of access, > but have never been invited. > > We're making an effort this winter to reorganize our shop volunteerism to > be more inclusive, and the discussion has led to addressing this. Without > speaking for others from the shop, I'll share my own thoughts: on one hand, > I hate the notion that someone's general economic status could disqualify > them from becoming a more involved member of our community. The other side > of that is that severe economic stress or a substance abuse problem can > have a serious influence on someone's behavior, and it isn't necessarily an > individual character judgement to be more cautious about access to our > entire shop (~150 bikes, 8 stands, power tools, etc - our whole > operation). But that lands you back in a pretty categorically classist > conclusion that poor(er) people are inherently less trustworthy in the > shop. I also don't like where that logic leads: where do you draw the line? > > My gut tells me that the potential benefit in granting someone that trust > is worth the risk, but I appreciate the other, more cautious perspective as > well. Any thoughts or experiences would be appreciated! > > Thanks, > Andy > Broke Spoke, Lexington KY > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: momoko saunders <analyst(a)bikefarm.org> > To: The Think Tank <thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org> > Cc: > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 12:33:30 -0800 > Subject: Re: [TheThinkTank] Big questions about trust, classism, and > preconceptions > Andy, > > At Bike Farm we have a similar policy. Volunteering for a steady two > months can lead to a key. You have to be nominated, and it's the > responsibility of the person who nominated you to ensure that you > understand the rules of the shop. > > We've had a number houseless folks be key holders. Besides the occasional > person sleeping at the shop when it's pouring freezing rain outside, we > haven't had any issues. But we are still selective of who we nominate. > > For example, there's a fellow who's been volunteering for months now. He's > super dedicated. But honestly, he displays some paranoid tendencies, and > sometimes get's into verbal altercations with others. We vote on who gets a > key, and just like all our decisions, anyone can veto a proposal. I would > vote "no" if this person came up for key nomination. I have no problems > with letting people know why I don't think it would be appropriate. > > There are a ton of valid reasons to object to someone's nomination. I hope > you and other volunteers feel comfortable enough to express yourselves. At > the same time, there are no rules for those valid reasons. Economic status > and or past drug use, to me, are not valid reasons to deny someone a key. > Try to base your conclusions on their present behaviour, not your > assumptions. > > It's lucky you get 4 months of time to observe the person in the shop. If > after 4 months, you're still not sure if you can trust them, hang out with > them more. Try being friends. What's their life like? > > It seems like you're searching for a rule to follow, but the reality is > that trust is something we develop. Trust is vital for shops like ours to > operate. > > I think if you really got to know the person, you would feel more > comfortable with trusting them with a key to the shop. You shouldn't be > afraid to express if you don't trust someone. But one would hope that > feeling of untrust is based on their actions, and not stereotypes. > > Good luck! Being accepting and conscientious isn't easy work. > -momoko > > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Andrew Shooner <ashooner(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Looking for some wisdom on what I think is a pretty deep question for our >> shop. Quick background: Broke Spoke is a non-profit community bike shop, >> with a mission to give everyone better access to better bikes, and enable >> everyone to do their own maintenance. A big part of our community has been >> a social services campus nearby which includes long-term residency, an >> overnight shelter, a free cafeteria, and a residential substance abuse >> rehab program. People from that center use the shop frequently, and are >> probably the most common group to earn bikes from the shop. >> >> Right now, once you regularly commit to a certain number of hours >> consistently for 4 months, we provide you a key to the shop, so you can >> come in on your own time to work on your own stuff and free up open shop >> hours so you can volunteer. This has always been by invitation rather than >> an automatic 'upgrade'. We have a small group of regular volunteers from >> the center some of whom would otherwise qualify for this type of access, >> but have never been invited. >> >> We're making an effort this winter to reorganize our shop volunteerism to >> be more inclusive, and the discussion has led to addressing this. Without >> speaking for others from the shop, I'll share my own thoughts: on one hand, >> I hate the notion that someone's general economic status could disqualify >> them from becoming a more involved member of our community. The other side >> of that is that severe economic stress or a substance abuse problem can >> have a serious influence on someone's behavior, and it isn't necessarily an >> individual character judgement to be more cautious about access to our >> entire shop (~150 bikes, 8 stands, power tools, etc - our whole >> operation). But that lands you back in a pretty categorically classist >> conclusion that poor(er) people are inherently less trustworthy in the >> shop. I also don't like where that logic leads: where do you draw the line? >> >> My gut tells me that the potential benefit in granting someone that trust >> is worth the risk, but I appreciate the other, more cautious perspective as >> well. Any thoughts or experiences would be appreciated! >> >> Thanks, >> Andy >> Broke Spoke, Lexington KY >> >> ____________________________________ >> >> The ThinkTank mailing List >> <a href="http://lists.bikecollectives.org/options.cgi/ >> thethinktank-bikecollectives.org">Unsubscribe from this list</a> >> >> >> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: momoko saunders <analyst(a)bikefarm.org> > To: The Think Tank <thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org> > Cc: > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 12:40:22 -0800 > Subject: Re: [TheThinkTank] Big questions about trust, classism, and > preconceptions > Oops, One last thing I forgot to say. > > One of the key reasons someone will be nominated for a key is to hold a > shift. We require two key holders for every shift. If the person has been > coming regularly to their shift for two months, and there is a need for a > 2nd or 3rd key holder on the shift, this is the usual reason someone gets a > key. So people don't get them just for showing up every once in a while for > two months. They have to show dedication! > > Coming to nearly every one of your shifts for 2 months is a requirement > that weeds out a lot of the less steady folks. This is a good litmus to > evaluate trust. > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 12:33 PM, momoko saunders <analyst(a)bikefarm.org> > wrote: > >> Andy, >> >> At Bike Farm we have a similar policy. Volunteering for a steady two >> months can lead to a key. You have to be nominated, and it's the >> responsibility of the person who nominated you to ensure that you >> understand the rules of the shop. >> >> We've had a number houseless folks be key holders. Besides the occasional >> person sleeping at the shop when it's pouring freezing rain outside, we >> haven't had any issues. But we are still selective of who we nominate. >> >> For example, there's a fellow who's been volunteering for months now. >> He's super dedicated. But honestly, he displays some paranoid tendencies, >> and sometimes get's into verbal altercations with others. We vote on who >> gets a key, and just like all our decisions, anyone can veto a proposal. I >> would vote "no" if this person came up for key nomination. I have no >> problems with letting people know why I don't think it would be >> appropriate. >> >> There are a ton of valid reasons to object to someone's nomination. I >> hope you and other volunteers feel comfortable enough to express >> yourselves. At the same time, there are no rules for those valid reasons. >> Economic status and or past drug use, to me, are not valid reasons to deny >> someone a key. Try to base your conclusions on their present behaviour, not >> your assumptions. >> >> It's lucky you get 4 months of time to observe the person in the shop. If >> after 4 months, you're still not sure if you can trust them, hang out with >> them more. Try being friends. What's their life like? >> >> It seems like you're searching for a rule to follow, but the reality is >> that trust is something we develop. Trust is vital for shops like ours to >> operate. >> >> I think if you really got to know the person, you would feel more >> comfortable with trusting them with a key to the shop. You shouldn't be >> afraid to express if you don't trust someone. But one would hope that >> feeling of untrust is based on their actions, and not stereotypes. >> >> Good luck! Being accepting and conscientious isn't easy work. >> -momoko >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Andrew Shooner <ashooner(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Looking for some wisdom on what I think is a pretty deep question for >>> our shop. Quick background: Broke Spoke is a non-profit community bike >>> shop, with a mission to give everyone better access to better bikes, and >>> enable everyone to do their own maintenance. A big part of our community >>> has been a social services campus nearby which includes long-term >>> residency, an overnight shelter, a free cafeteria, and a residential >>> substance abuse rehab program. People from that center use the shop >>> frequently, and are probably the most common group to earn bikes from the >>> shop. >>> >>> Right now, once you regularly commit to a certain number of hours >>> consistently for 4 months, we provide you a key to the shop, so you can >>> come in on your own time to work on your own stuff and free up open shop >>> hours so you can volunteer. This has always been by invitation rather than >>> an automatic 'upgrade'. We have a small group of regular volunteers from >>> the center some of whom would otherwise qualify for this type of access, >>> but have never been invited. >>> >>> We're making an effort this winter to reorganize our shop volunteerism >>> to be more inclusive, and the discussion has led to addressing this. >>> Without speaking for others from the shop, I'll share my own thoughts: on >>> one hand, I hate the notion that someone's general economic status could >>> disqualify them from becoming a more involved member of our community. The >>> other side of that is that severe economic stress or a substance abuse >>> problem can have a serious influence on someone's behavior, and it isn't >>> necessarily an individual character judgement to be more cautious about >>> access to our entire shop (~150 bikes, 8 stands, power tools, etc - our >>> whole operation). But that lands you back in a pretty categorically >>> classist conclusion that poor(er) people are inherently less trustworthy in >>> the shop. I also don't like where that logic leads: where do you draw the >>> line? >>> >>> My gut tells me that the potential benefit in granting someone that >>> trust is worth the risk, but I appreciate the other, more cautious >>> perspective as well. Any thoughts or experiences would be appreciated! >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Andy >>> Broke Spoke, Lexington KY >>> >>> ____________________________________ >>> >>> The ThinkTank mailing List >>> <a href="http://lists.bikecollectives.org/options.cgi/thethinkt >>> ank-bikecollectives.org">Unsubscribe from this list</a> >>> >>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Thethinktank mailing list > Thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org > http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank- > bikecollectives.org > >

5 4

Re: [TheThinkTank] Thethinktank Digest, Vol 125, Issue 9
by Geoffrey Smart 14 Feb '17

14 Feb '17

Re:Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions. At Back2Bikes we do not have a specific period before someone gets keyholder rights but the person must show that they can be relied upon to turn up regularly over several months. We have had in the past a couple of keyholders with psychiatric / possible substance abuse issues. In one case it worked out fine and in the other there were question marks over possible missing money or more likely parts. However, at another non profit I was involved in a large amount of money was embezzled by a person who to all appearances was already well off. My thoughts are that it is just as likely that dishonesty can come from people of any class and that keyholder privileges should be given on the basis of the individuals character, not their social background or the fact that they may be currently going through a difficult period in their lives, In fact keyholder rights in some circumstances can help some individuals increase their sense of self worth and lead to positive outcomes in that persons life. We did run a second location for a year in the premises of an organisation which offered cheap meals and attempted to find disadvantaged people jobs and housing. In this location the workshop could not be left unlocked at all due to the clients who were not attending the workshop picking up anything that was not bolted down. I think that really is a greater problem than people who are making an effort to be involved. Geoff Back2Bikes Port Melbourne Australia On 15 February 2017 at 08:12, < thethinktank-request(a)lists.bikecollectives.org> wrote: > Send Thethinktank mailing list submissions to > thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank- > bikecollectives.org > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > thethinktank-request(a)lists.bikecollectives.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > thethinktank-owner(a)lists.bikecollectives.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Thethinktank digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions > (Andrew Shooner) > 2. Re: Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions > (momoko saunders) > 3. Re: Big questions about trust, classism, and preconceptions > (momoko saunders) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Andrew Shooner <ashooner(a)gmail.com> > To: The Think Tank <thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org> > Cc: > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 14:57:27 -0500 > Subject: [TheThinkTank] Big questions about trust, classism, and > preconceptions > Hi all, > > Looking for some wisdom on what I think is a pretty deep question for our > shop. Quick background: Broke Spoke is a non-profit community bike shop, > with a mission to give everyone better access to better bikes, and enable > everyone to do their own maintenance. A big part of our community has been > a social services campus nearby which includes long-term residency, an > overnight shelter, a free cafeteria, and a residential substance abuse > rehab program. People from that center use the shop frequently, and are > probably the most common group to earn bikes from the shop. > > Right now, once you regularly commit to a certain number of hours > consistently for 4 months, we provide you a key to the shop, so you can > come in on your own time to work on your own stuff and free up open shop > hours so you can volunteer. This has always been by invitation rather than > an automatic 'upgrade'. We have a small group of regular volunteers from > the center some of whom would otherwise qualify for this type of access, > but have never been invited. > > We're making an effort this winter to reorganize our shop volunteerism to > be more inclusive, and the discussion has led to addressing this. Without > speaking for others from the shop, I'll share my own thoughts: on one hand, > I hate the notion that someone's general economic status could disqualify > them from becoming a more involved member of our community. The other side > of that is that severe economic stress or a substance abuse problem can > have a serious influence on someone's behavior, and it isn't necessarily an > individual character judgement to be more cautious about access to our > entire shop (~150 bikes, 8 stands, power tools, etc - our whole > operation). But that lands you back in a pretty categorically classist > conclusion that poor(er) people are inherently less trustworthy in the > shop. I also don't like where that logic leads: where do you draw the line? > > My gut tells me that the potential benefit in granting someone that trust > is worth the risk, but I appreciate the other, more cautious perspective as > well. Any thoughts or experiences would be appreciated! > > Thanks, > Andy > Broke Spoke, Lexington KY > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: momoko saunders <analyst(a)bikefarm.org> > To: The Think Tank <thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org> > Cc: > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 12:33:30 -0800 > Subject: Re: [TheThinkTank] Big questions about trust, classism, and > preconceptions > Andy, > > At Bike Farm we have a similar policy. Volunteering for a steady two > months can lead to a key. You have to be nominated, and it's the > responsibility of the person who nominated you to ensure that you > understand the rules of the shop. > > We've had a number houseless folks be key holders. Besides the occasional > person sleeping at the shop when it's pouring freezing rain outside, we > haven't had any issues. But we are still selective of who we nominate. > > For example, there's a fellow who's been volunteering for months now. He's > super dedicated. But honestly, he displays some paranoid tendencies, and > sometimes get's into verbal altercations with others. We vote on who gets a > key, and just like all our decisions, anyone can veto a proposal. I would > vote "no" if this person came up for key nomination. I have no problems > with letting people know why I don't think it would be appropriate. > > There are a ton of valid reasons to object to someone's nomination. I hope > you and other volunteers feel comfortable enough to express yourselves. At > the same time, there are no rules for those valid reasons. Economic status > and or past drug use, to me, are not valid reasons to deny someone a key. > Try to base your conclusions on their present behaviour, not your > assumptions. > > It's lucky you get 4 months of time to observe the person in the shop. If > after 4 months, you're still not sure if you can trust them, hang out with > them more. Try being friends. What's their life like? > > It seems like you're searching for a rule to follow, but the reality is > that trust is something we develop. Trust is vital for shops like ours to > operate. > > I think if you really got to know the person, you would feel more > comfortable with trusting them with a key to the shop. You shouldn't be > afraid to express if you don't trust someone. But one would hope that > feeling of untrust is based on their actions, and not stereotypes. > > Good luck! Being accepting and conscientious isn't easy work. > -momoko > > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Andrew Shooner <ashooner(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Looking for some wisdom on what I think is a pretty deep question for our >> shop. Quick background: Broke Spoke is a non-profit community bike shop, >> with a mission to give everyone better access to better bikes, and enable >> everyone to do their own maintenance. A big part of our community has been >> a social services campus nearby which includes long-term residency, an >> overnight shelter, a free cafeteria, and a residential substance abuse >> rehab program. People from that center use the shop frequently, and are >> probably the most common group to earn bikes from the shop. >> >> Right now, once you regularly commit to a certain number of hours >> consistently for 4 months, we provide you a key to the shop, so you can >> come in on your own time to work on your own stuff and free up open shop >> hours so you can volunteer. This has always been by invitation rather than >> an automatic 'upgrade'. We have a small group of regular volunteers from >> the center some of whom would otherwise qualify for this type of access, >> but have never been invited. >> >> We're making an effort this winter to reorganize our shop volunteerism to >> be more inclusive, and the discussion has led to addressing this. Without >> speaking for others from the shop, I'll share my own thoughts: on one hand, >> I hate the notion that someone's general economic status could disqualify >> them from becoming a more involved member of our community. The other side >> of that is that severe economic stress or a substance abuse problem can >> have a serious influence on someone's behavior, and it isn't necessarily an >> individual character judgement to be more cautious about access to our >> entire shop (~150 bikes, 8 stands, power tools, etc - our whole >> operation). But that lands you back in a pretty categorically classist >> conclusion that poor(er) people are inherently less trustworthy in the >> shop. I also don't like where that logic leads: where do you draw the line? >> >> My gut tells me that the potential benefit in granting someone that trust >> is worth the risk, but I appreciate the other, more cautious perspective as >> well. Any thoughts or experiences would be appreciated! >> >> Thanks, >> Andy >> Broke Spoke, Lexington KY >> >> ____________________________________ >> >> The ThinkTank mailing List >> <a href="http://lists.bikecollectives.org/options.cgi/ >> thethinktank-bikecollectives.org">Unsubscribe from this list</a> >> >> >> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: momoko saunders <analyst(a)bikefarm.org> > To: The Think Tank <thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org> > Cc: > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 12:40:22 -0800 > Subject: Re: [TheThinkTank] Big questions about trust, classism, and > preconceptions > Oops, One last thing I forgot to say. > > One of the key reasons someone will be nominated for a key is to hold a > shift. We require two key holders for every shift. If the person has been > coming regularly to their shift for two months, and there is a need for a > 2nd or 3rd key holder on the shift, this is the usual reason someone gets a > key. So people don't get them just for showing up every once in a while for > two months. They have to show dedication! > > Coming to nearly every one of your shifts for 2 months is a requirement > that weeds out a lot of the less steady folks. This is a good litmus to > evaluate trust. > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 12:33 PM, momoko saunders <analyst(a)bikefarm.org> > wrote: > >> Andy, >> >> At Bike Farm we have a similar policy. Volunteering for a steady two >> months can lead to a key. You have to be nominated, and it's the >> responsibility of the person who nominated you to ensure that you >> understand the rules of the shop. >> >> We've had a number houseless folks be key holders. Besides the occasional >> person sleeping at the shop when it's pouring freezing rain outside, we >> haven't had any issues. But we are still selective of who we nominate. >> >> For example, there's a fellow who's been volunteering for months now. >> He's super dedicated. But honestly, he displays some paranoid tendencies, >> and sometimes get's into verbal altercations with others. We vote on who >> gets a key, and just like all our decisions, anyone can veto a proposal. I >> would vote "no" if this person came up for key nomination. I have no >> problems with letting people know why I don't think it would be >> appropriate. >> >> There are a ton of valid reasons to object to someone's nomination. I >> hope you and other volunteers feel comfortable enough to express >> yourselves. At the same time, there are no rules for those valid reasons. >> Economic status and or past drug use, to me, are not valid reasons to deny >> someone a key. Try to base your conclusions on their present behaviour, not >> your assumptions. >> >> It's lucky you get 4 months of time to observe the person in the shop. If >> after 4 months, you're still not sure if you can trust them, hang out with >> them more. Try being friends. What's their life like? >> >> It seems like you're searching for a rule to follow, but the reality is >> that trust is something we develop. Trust is vital for shops like ours to >> operate. >> >> I think if you really got to know the person, you would feel more >> comfortable with trusting them with a key to the shop. You shouldn't be >> afraid to express if you don't trust someone. But one would hope that >> feeling of untrust is based on their actions, and not stereotypes. >> >> Good luck! Being accepting and conscientious isn't easy work. >> -momoko >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Andrew Shooner <ashooner(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Looking for some wisdom on what I think is a pretty deep question for >>> our shop. Quick background: Broke Spoke is a non-profit community bike >>> shop, with a mission to give everyone better access to better bikes, and >>> enable everyone to do their own maintenance. A big part of our community >>> has been a social services campus nearby which includes long-term >>> residency, an overnight shelter, a free cafeteria, and a residential >>> substance abuse rehab program. People from that center use the shop >>> frequently, and are probably the most common group to earn bikes from the >>> shop. >>> >>> Right now, once you regularly commit to a certain number of hours >>> consistently for 4 months, we provide you a key to the shop, so you can >>> come in on your own time to work on your own stuff and free up open shop >>> hours so you can volunteer. This has always been by invitation rather than >>> an automatic 'upgrade'. We have a small group of regular volunteers from >>> the center some of whom would otherwise qualify for this type of access, >>> but have never been invited. >>> >>> We're making an effort this winter to reorganize our shop volunteerism >>> to be more inclusive, and the discussion has led to addressing this. >>> Without speaking for others from the shop, I'll share my own thoughts: on >>> one hand, I hate the notion that someone's general economic status could >>> disqualify them from becoming a more involved member of our community. The >>> other side of that is that severe economic stress or a substance abuse >>> problem can have a serious influence on someone's behavior, and it isn't >>> necessarily an individual character judgement to be more cautious about >>> access to our entire shop (~150 bikes, 8 stands, power tools, etc - our >>> whole operation). But that lands you back in a pretty categorically >>> classist conclusion that poor(er) people are inherently less trustworthy in >>> the shop. I also don't like where that logic leads: where do you draw the >>> line? >>> >>> My gut tells me that the potential benefit in granting someone that >>> trust is worth the risk, but I appreciate the other, more cautious >>> perspective as well. Any thoughts or experiences would be appreciated! >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Andy >>> Broke Spoke, Lexington KY >>> >>> ____________________________________ >>> >>> The ThinkTank mailing List >>> <a href="http://lists.bikecollectives.org/options.cgi/thethinkt >>> ank-bikecollectives.org">Unsubscribe from this list</a> >>> >>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Thethinktank mailing list > Thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org > http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank- > bikecollectives.org > >

1 0

Europe bike support
by Tigre Bici 10 Feb '17

10 Feb '17

Hello you'all! Our main mechanic is traveling on vacation to Europe on teh last days of may and all June. Arriving to Amsterdam and bike travelling trough Germany and other countries so is there anyone that can provide with some info on where to get a bike/bike paths and ocassional mechanic jobs to get some money/food. We'll appreciate any info. Thanks ¡Que siga el pedal! -TigreBici

9 9

Hiring a Development Manager at Neighborhood Bike Works
by Steve Maluk 06 Feb '17

06 Feb '17

Hello Think Tankers! Neighborhood Bike Works (in Philadelphia) is hiring a new full-time Development Manager. Below is the full description, or there's a link to it here <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_LLp3IEMVgxWjF5cjhlMnJQSWc/view>. Please check it out and, if there are people in your network you think could be a good fit, please share it. Thanks! -Steve *___* Development Manager – Neighborhood Bike Works Position Summary: Neighborhood Bike Works (NBW) is seeking a full-time Development Manager to lead a wide-ranging fundraising strategy to support NBW’s youth and community programming. The Development Manager works closely with the Executive Director to establish annual fundraising and communications goals, and to plan and implement NBW’s development strategy. Specifically, the Development Manager oversees major fundraising campaigns, communications, and grant proposals, taking the lead on two of NBW’s primary revenue sources: foundations grants and individual giving. About Neighborhood Bike Works: In 2017, NBW will build on its recent growth and relocation to a new community shop and bike education hub. NBW is celebrating 20 years of using bikes as the hook to engage youth in positive out-of-school-time activities. By learning bike mechanics and exploring the city by bike, young people at NBW build life skills and healthy habits, and gain leadership experience. Based in West Philadelphia, we primarily serve youth of color from low-income communities. In addition to our youth programs, NBW provides a DIY bicycle workshop space for adults as well as community outreach programs to promote cycling. More information regarding NBW can be found at neighborhoodbikeworks.org. Start Date & Work Schedule: The start date for this position is Monday, March 20, 2017. Typical work hours for full-time NBW staff are Monday through Friday, from 10am to 6pm, with occasional evening or weekend work required. Some work may be remotely. Reports to: Executive Director Primary Responsibilities: Grant Writing, Reporting, and Relationship Management with Private Funding Sources (40%) - Prepare grant applications & reports in coordination with Executive Director and Director of Youth Programs. - Maintain NBW’s grant application and reporting calendar. Research new private sources of support, including foundations and corporate sources. - Work with colleagues to develop strong case statements for Neighborhood Bike Works’ programs and special projects. - Manage schedule for regular, planned contact with foundations and corporate supporters. Work with Executive Director to maintain positive contact with funders throughout the year. - Work with Director of Youth Programs to brief youth program staff on grant funding opportunities, facilitating assessment of fit with overall program strategies. Individual Donor Campaigns (30%) - Coordinate two direct mail fundraising appeals (Annual Giving Campaign & Summer Camp Campaign). Prepare mailing lists and oversee distribution and follow up activities. - Lead donor recruitment and cultivation strategy for major donors, recurring donors, and new donors. - Research donor prospects and maintain donor records. - Support the Executive Director in donor cultivation and formal asks, by preparing cultivation materials and talking points, and managing individual donor cultivation plans. Events, Communications, and Other Activities (30%) - Lead special fundraising events throughout the year, including house parties, community events, and large scale fundraising event. - Support NBW non-development staff in understanding and participating in fundraising activities, including preparing for site visits, training staff on communicating with the public, volunteers, and constituents as a part of the development process. - Support and, in some cases, take the lead on communications activities, including writing content for e-newsletter, interfacing with graphic designer, and writing press releases. - Prepare regular fundraising progress reports for NBW board meetings. - Support and consult Development Committee of the Board of Directors to engage all members of the Board in effectively supporting NBW’s development efforts. - Using NBW’s donor management software, maintain complete and accurate records of grants, gifts, and relationships for individuals and institutional funders. - Participate in NBW’s strategic planning process and assist in developing short and long-term program plans for core and advanced programs. Qualifications: The ideal candidate will have 2+ years of development experience, ideally in grant-writing, individual donor campaigns, and in major donor cultivation. Excellent written and verbal communication skills are required, with a demonstrated ability to produce clear, compelling narratives quickly and confidently. Background knowledge of Philadelphia’s education system, history, bicycling community, and networks of youth development organizations is preferred. Candidates with non-traditional work and education experience are encouraged – please tell us about those experiences that qualify you for this position. Additional Qualifications: - Driven by the mission and work of NBW. - Commitment to social justice and youth leadership. - Willingness to work as a team player with other staff and the NBW board of directors. - Self-motivated with a keen attention to detail. - High degree of familiarity with current computer technology, social media, and ability to learn our fundraising database (NEON). - Sense of humor, patience, and flexibility. NBW is a collaborative and fast-paced work environment. - Successful passing of PA State Police Criminal Background Check, Pennsylvania Child Abuse History Clearance, and FBI Clearance required. Compensation: This is a full-time, exempt, salaried position. The pay range for this position will be $38,000 to $42,000 annually, depending on experience and qualifications. NBW offers a competitive benefits package, including health, dental, and retirement plans. Additionally, NBW offers 10 paid vacation days to first-year employees, personal paid time off, a flex time policy, and an employee purchase benefit on bicycles, parts, and accessories. Please email a resume, cover letter, and one-page development-related writing sample to jobs(a)neighborhoodbikeworks.org. Applications received by February 24, 2017 will receive priority consideration. We are an Equal Opportunity Employer and actively seek staff who reflect the community we serve. Candidates of color are encouraged to apply.

1 0

Re: [TheThinkTank] CiviCRM
by Sam Haraldson 03 Feb '17

03 Feb '17

With the newly posted question regarding SalesForce I thought I would dredge up this conversation from late 2016 that discussed both CiviCRM as well as Vtracklery. I for one am interested in hearing more from Matthew at the Recyclerly as to how Vtracklery 2.0 is coming along (if at all) as it seems like a prime solution to meet needs and opportunities that we have at the Bozeman Bike Kitchen. Thanks, Sam On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Matthew McMunn <matthew(a)therecyclery.org> wrote: > The Recyclery has just started working on a software project that you > might be interested in. Check out the link to a grant proposal we just > submitted: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-Ydw0IHFwAwZjFaTnlYRGNQUnc/ > view?usp=sharing We are using open source code to build our new > "VTracklery 2.0"system, so anyone can us it and add on to it for free. We > will be rolling it out late 2017. > Matthew > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:13 PM Jonathan Morrison < > jonathan(a)bicyclecollective.org> wrote: > >> Has anyone been using (https://civicrm.org/) or would they recommend a >> different software package? >> >> -Jonathan >> >> >>

3 2

Re: [TheThinkTank] CiviCRM
by jack 03 Feb '17

03 Feb '17

We got Salesforce up and running with no outside consultant. I'm reasonably computer literate but by no means an expert. Zero out of pocket cost, just a few (?) hours of my time. <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Sam Haraldson <sam(a)bozemanbikekitchen.org> </div><div>Date:02/03/2017 2:01 PM (GMT-06:00) </div><div>To: The Think Tank <thethinktank(a)lists.bikecollectives.org> </div><div>Subject: Re: [TheThinkTank] CiviCRM </div><div> </div>With the newly posted question regarding SalesForce I thought I would dredge up this conversation from late 2016 that discussed both CiviCRM as well as Vtracklery. I for one am interested in hearing more from Matthew at the Recyclerly as to how Vtracklery 2.0 is coming along (if at all) as it seems like a prime solution to meet needs and opportunities that we have at the Bozeman Bike Kitchen. Thanks, Sam On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Matthew McMunn <matthew(a)therecyclery.org> wrote: The Recyclery has just started working on a software project that you might be interested in. Check out the link to a grant proposal we just submitted: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-Ydw0IHFwAwZjFaTnlYRGNQUnc/view?usp=shari… We are using open source code to build our new "VTracklery 2.0"system, so anyone can us it and add on to it for free. We will be rolling it out late 2017. Matthew On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:13 PM Jonathan Morrison <jonathan(a)bicyclecollective.org> wrote: Has anyone been using (https://civicrm.org/) or would they recommend a different software package? -Jonathan

1 0

Re: [TheThinkTank] Job Posting
by Malagodi, Chuck H. 03 Feb '17

03 Feb '17

Contract for Safe Routes to School/Bicycle Educator Essential Duties and Accountabilities: Plan, schedule, perform, and evaluate Safe Routes to School/ bicycle programming including but not limited to; Safe Walking programming, Bike Rodeos, Share the Road presentations, Mountain Bike Skills programming, and Safety/Health Fairs Provide technical assistance and conduct presentations to Albuquerque Public Schools and community organizations concerning alternative means of transportation. Excellent presentation skills in front of large audience required Maintain general up-keep of City of Albuquerque owned bicycle safety equipment and bikes. Provide business license and liability insurance. Have or be able to obtain the League of American Bicyclist LCI certification within 6 months. Be available to work on call including odd hours, weekends and in extreme weather conditions. Possess a valid NM driver’s license and be able to obtain a City of Albuquerque Operator’s Permit. Contract amount not to exceed $38,000.00 /12 months Legal Compliance: This is a Federally Funded project. The contract shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, including, but not limited to laws governing civil rights, equal opportunity compliance, environmental and cultural resource requirements, work place safety, employer-employee relations, and all other laws governing operation of the workplace, including laws and regulations hereafter enacted. The Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of New Mexico. Interviews will be held prior to selection. Please submit cover letter on how you are acquainted with the above duties, and resume to, cmalagodi(a)cabq.gov<mailto:cmalagodi@cabq.gov>. By noon on February 15, 2017. Electronic submissions only, no mailed or faxed submissions will be considered. Chuck Malagodi Outdoor Recreation Coordinator 1801 Fourth St. NW, Buliding A Albuquerque, NM 87102 505-768-BIKE (2453) Cmalagodi(a)cabq.gov

1 0