--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/Sufferings/2020-02-01/notes.txt	Sun Jun 14 14:25:20 2020 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+*Report from QCEA*
+
+*Joint statement wrt Brexit from B & I YMs*
+
+*Trustees consultation*
+
+Acknowledged concerns about decisions wrt meeting-centred support
+
+"Very clear steer" from MfS was "that Vibrancy had been a good thing"
+
+But we didn't _ever_ hear about or endorse the new plan
+
+Simple charity -- more work coming on that
+ What do _we_ need from the centre to help us be simpler
+
+LDW and Hubs: 38 responses
+ Experiment with one hub later this year
+ LDW roll-out 'immediately', will take years, still "in reach of"
+  every meeting
+
+PP: Gradual process, will continue to be wealth of specialist
+    expertise in London
+    Discussion w. QLCC on what kinds specialist expertise is needed
+    and when it needs to be _in London_.
+
+*Speaking out*
+
+Thoughtful contributions from staff
+
+Drawing out two continua
+ * Complelled to witness <--> Compelled to achieve change
+ * Be distinctively Quaker <--> Voice all concerns
+
+York 2009 on SSM as example of witness w/o expectation of change
+_achieving_ change
+
+***Nominations to JYM needed by 10 March***
+
+*Diversity*
+Sam McNair reported very impressively on a Diversity and Inclusion
+5: Hilda Clark
+ Gay X find X->Y trans people challenging to their own choices wrt
+  their own dismorphia
+ Not all trans people are prepared/able to 'come out' to everyone in a
+  new meeting: how would we as a Meeting cope with a gradual spread of
+  knowledge?
+ Meeting equivalent of a pen-friend -- e.g. 'twinning' with a Meeting
+  from Ghana
+ Finding a way to make a space that's safe for people who are
+  labouring under the experience of being 'other' in some way to share
+  that: they may have been waiting a long time for the opportunity...
+
+*YM Gathering*
+https://www.quaker.org.uk/ym
+Theme: Listening, prophecy and reconciliation: Allyship in a climate emergency
+
+This emerged from discussions between YM Agenda Committee and JYM
+Arrangements C'ttee
+
+ 1) Why should we care about inclusion when we need to focus on the emergency?
+ 3) Discussing the hard stuff tenderly without blowing up
+ 2) Remembering the warnings of the 1970s and 1980s as prophecy, what
+     are we hearing _now_ that is prophetic
+------------
+News about Hubs and LDWs v. welcome, one aspect of this has been
+concerning members of my AM, which is the LDW recruitment process
+
+Vibrancy in Meetings evaluation [has some good things to say about the
+value of the LDW-Centre connection]
+
+- Quaker discipline 2nd-largest "of all presenting needs"
+
+- What is important
+
+  "delivered by a skilled worker and based on deep understanding of
+   local meetings and the local context"
+
+- Recommendations
+
+  "there is considerable need [in Meetings] around the basics of
+   Quakerism, meetings and processes"
+----
+
+ "As Quakers, we all share responsibility for the Meeting. You may
+  have questions about Quakerism in general, or our Meeting in
+  particular ~ if so, please feel free to share these with someone
+  sitting near you.  If they can't help you, they can probably point
+  out someone to you who probably can.
+
+I accept that the evidence has convinced Trustees that overall we are
+not delivering on that promise, and that paid LDWs are necessary.
+
+Couldn't find in the record whether the 4 VW were
+Members/Attenders/...
+
+And I take it from reviewing various job ads that we do not ever
+'require' applicants to be Members.
+
+But all the evaluation comments, and my takeaway from the video,
+suggest that that would be very desirable.
+
+Is this recognised as a priority?
+
+Will we at least advertise 'internally' before publicly?
+-----------
+In practice, not a problem: no-one could apply w/o a "deep
+understanding" (not Membership, YFs not joining on principle).
+
+[wrist-slap from Clerk -- too 'narrow']
+