--- a/Sufferings/2018-04-07/notes.txt	Sat Apr 07 06:43:27 2018 -0400
+++ b/Sufferings/2018-04-07/notes.txt	Sat Apr 07 08:06:02 2018 -0400
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
 QF&P provides for an process of appeal to MfS with respect to
 decisions of an Area Meeting and disputes between Area Meeting.
 Experience with this process has been less than wholly positive, and
-MfS commissioned a review.  The review group reported with
+MfS commissioned a review.  The Review Group reported with
 recommendations for a narrowed and simplified process, including a
 preference for a "conflict transformation" approach (as opposed to
 "conflict resolution") and an explicit place for mediation before
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
 _early_ is essential to avoid exacerbating aspects of a situation
 through ignorance.
 
-The review group also suggested that beyond the narrow matter of an
+The Review Group also suggested that beyond the narrow matter of an
 appeals procedure, the larger question of how we deal with conflict as
 a Society, as Meetings and as individuals needs to be considered.
 
@@ -34,3 +34,48 @@
 often arise from "lack of familiarity with Quaker ... processes" and
 that accordingly care for a Ministry of Teaching in our meetings is
 necessary to help promote this familiarity.
+
+*Report of BYM Sustainability Group Review Group*
+
+The Review Group reminded us of the Canterbury Commitment:
+
+  http://www.quaker.org.uk/documents/minute-36-leaflet-2011
+
+The Sustainability Group was established by Sufferings to lead/guide
+BYM in taking the Commitment forward.
+
+The situation is complex, the SG has achieved much, but also struggled
+much.  The RG recommended laying the SG down, probably soon after the
+next Sustainability Gathering, in favour of mandating coordination
+between the different areas at the Central level which can and do
+support sustainability.  Concern was expressed by myself and others
+that giving responsibility for overseeing this coordination to
+Sufferings without any detail on how this to be carried out leaves a
+very significant gap and risks simply recreating the SG under another
+name.  Actually deciding to lay the SG down without a clear picture of
+what's going to take it place seems premature.
+
+The need for a clearer articulation of the largely unspoken spiritual
+basis for the Commitment was raised.
+
+The oft-remarked tension resurfaced between a feeling on the part of
+many that we ought to put sustainability at the centre of our efforts
+and a recognition that many others who don't seem to be interested in
+doing so.
+
+  Some quotes from the floor:
+
+  "It's not surprising that we struggle, and blame each other, and get
+   stuck." (Laurie Michaelis)
+
+  "This is the biggest thing we've ever tried to deal with."
+
+  "Giving responsibility but no authority to working groups [such as
+   SG] is Kafkaesque, not Quakerly"
+
+  "How do we connect a BYM Concern with [the priorities and funding
+   choices] of the centrally-managed work]." (Lis Burch)
+
+  "What is it that has caused us to try to do this and fail 5 times?"
+
+[Testimonies C'tee to Sufferings in 2007?]

--- a/Sufferings/2018-04-07/report.txt	Sat Apr 07 06:43:27 2018 -0400
+++ b/Sufferings/2018-04-07/report.txt	Sat Apr 07 08:06:02 2018 -0400
@@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
 
   http://www.quaker.org.uk/documents/mfs-april-2018-agenda--papers-package
 
+This includes, in particular, the two Review Group reports discussed below.
+
 The minutes and other follow-up material will also appear sometime
 soon linked from