I’ve just been taking a look at the stuff online relating to Spokes; it all seems a bit dormant since the quite fun Bike Breakfast in February. Not that this site has had much traffic either!
Is it the right time to consider joining forces and doing this stuff openly together? @jon.dean and I have spoken about this in the past, and I wonder if the time is right.
I could imagine Better Streets NZ being rebranded as Spokes NZ, and taking over the role of the Spokes email list, Spokes Facebook page, Spokes website, and collaboration tool. There are other ways that it could work but that would be super-efficient.
Lets face it, we are all essentially a bunch of cycle advocates here. And the last thing that we need is any dilution.
I’ve never been an official member of Spokes Dunedin so I can’t speak for them, but as a general member of the public and keen cyclist, I think merging Spokes and Better Streets in some way is certainly worth considering.
The only concern I have is that among the members of Better Streets there are, unless I’m mistaken, consultants currently working alongside the DCC and presumably being paid for this work.
Won’t this present a potential conflict of interest? If Spokes and Better Streets have both been set up as independent cycling advocacy groups, members who are also being employed by DCC, no matter how supportive of cycling they might be, could be put in a very awkward position. Also, the media and the anti-biking grumblers would have a field day if they found out.
I’ve just pulled this over to Members Only so we can discuss that off the internet.
Personally I don’t think so. Rather they are aligned interests, and this is an opportunity for constructive partnership - as long as it is done openly.
A group does not lose independence if it speaks with others. In fact it must, in order to be effective. I can’t think of anything more pointless than a cycle advocacy group (or any other group) that surrounds itself with a thick wall before talking to themselves ad nauseum.
Now when money is involved, it gets a little different. But not that different. The NGO landscape is full of organisations which accept government money - and then use it to go and lobby the very same government.
Where things get dodgey is when this occurs on the sly. Where bribes are given in secret and deals made behind closed doors.
Now to resolve this concern, we could very easily have a seperate group for ‘guests’ that we interact with online - such as DCC staffers or consultants. This would differentiate them from ‘members’ nicely and tidy up any such confusion.
I think the key here is some indication of what hat you’re talking under when posting. I’m co-chair of a Trust that’s working with the Council and as such there’s the ‘party line’ as a Trustee and there’s my personal opinion. If & when they differ I need to be clear when I’m speaking as an individual and not as a Trustee.
I’d also hope that if Council or Consultantcy staff post here as staff, it’s indicated that it’s from or on behalf of a specific organisation rather than as an individual. I know 9 times out of 10 those two viewpoints will be the same, but it does remove confusion.
Interesting discussion! I don’t see a conflict of interest if it is declared. I think you all know me but just in case - I’m John Lieswyn. I wear a bunch of hats. Chair of Transportation Group NZ. On the board of Cycling Action Network. Core member (although I don’t have much time for it) of Spokes Christchurch. Director of ViaStrada. And leading the consultant team for the W&C networks strategy programme business case and master plan. I met many of you at recent drop-in session and Network Operating Framework workshops. By listening to you all on this page, I am gathering your input for the project maps and lists.
After a good chat with @Duncan last night, it might be time to revisit this / follow through with it. Shall we all catch up and discuss this? What is the right forum / place / time?
I’d love to help out and be involved. Each platform has its pros and cons. The Biking in Dunedin group on Facebook now has close to 2500 members, but it’s only a Facebook group and the vast majority of the members are very passive, possibly even with their BiD notifications turned off. I still like the idea of keeping BiD as a kind of cheerleader group for all aspects of cycling in Dunedin, but ensure that Spokes Dunedin is the main voice of cycling advocacy, with a public face to keep followers and members engaged, but also a very active behind the scenes presence too.
I really appreciate the idea of Nathan using the Betterstreets.nz framework, but rebranded as Spokes Dunedin. I think we should also take a look at what Cycle Wellington is doing. They have a regular newsletter, a website, a Facebook group and so much engagement.
As I believe both Jon and I have said before, we agree that Spokes on Better Streets would be a great move. I agree with Duncan’s comments on FB, and in today’s busy (online) world. @jon.dean, can we move the domain to point at a page on better streets? Can we cancel any other hosting and pass the money we would have spent to Nathan? I wish I had more time for cycling stuff… Dunedin certainly needs change… but the hours (minutes) I can dedicate to the cause is very squeezed at the moment.
I still think Better Streets is a great name for bringing PT, scooter, disability groups all together: Spokes can be a sub-part (the cycling part) of Better Streets, So if the Spokes website is “hosted by” Better Streets and Better Streets still has it’s own identity and landing pages?
There is no ‘other’ part - it simply didn’t materialise. Was a nice idea to be inclusive of all other road users, but didn’t fly as a community concept. We tend to function better as humans when in a ‘tribe’ - it was too broad.
Now, a federation of interested road user / active transport tribes - that could have worked. But it would have taken a dedicated core of folk from those tribes working together to make it happen. We couldn’t make that happen.
Technically, it would actually be much easier to do what you suggest. Perhaps we should even do that as the first step on this journey. However, essentially all the discussion on this Forum to date has been cycling centric. Additionally, nesting Spokes within Better Streets adds an unhelpful layer of complexity (accounts, website, app, etc) for members (as does Facebook).
I agree it might be simpler to convert the BetterStreets website etc to Spokes, and keep it focused particularly on cycling. But we can also reach out to other groups in the Dunedin community who support buses, walking, escooters etc. Form a kind of kind of ABC federation (“Anything But Cars”) to meet and collaborate on a shared vision.
Being the Facebook tragic that I am, I’ll keep on cheerleading through the very broad church “Biking in Dunedin” group, but use it partly as a way of encouraging the more engaged and “biketivistic” to join Spokes. Can I suggest that aside from having Spokes takeover the BetterStreets website, we also convert the Spokes FB Page into a Group? (or if not possible, simply set up a new Spokes Group).
One of the reasons I set up the BiD group in the first place was because Spokes’ FB presence is only has a Page, which allows for far less interaction than a Group. I’d happily continue administering BID and also help out on a new Spokes FB Group. It wouldn’t require us having to produce lots more content. It would basically just be mirroring what’s on the Better-Streets-rebranded-as-Spokes website but in the FB format.
An update on this - I had a good chat with Jon on the weekend. He’s going to discuss it with Fraser and the other Spokes core members, and we’ll go ahead with what they are comfortable with.
It is really difficult to manage multiple silo’d communities; the more you increase the complexity of the ‘ecosystem’, the more you dilute the userbase and the available volunteer workforce, and the greater the risk of failure. While we can semi-automate cross-posts, this tends to be a bit pointless as the conversations become disjointed and disconnected unless it is read-only on one or the other.
I’d strongly recommend Spokes only going for a single platform and running with it. One solid Facebook group in this domain is plenty.
I’m happy either way: I think that keeping two brands gives the best of both worlds. Maybe if you enter via spokes url you see Spokes “hosted by betterstreets”, and if you enter via betterstreets you see Spokes as a sub forum?
We can certainly make the Spokes URL redirect to spokes easily which will do that.
I’m a little confused about how to handle Dunedin-centric stuff that isn’t cycling. I think I’d just be best to depreciate the location specific Categories and make them Tags instead. Hey, there isn’t much of it!
So have done the next step - we now have the spokes Category with nice logos and open access.