Present: @Douglas Webb, @Martin Schott, @Vinicio De Angelis, @Raphael Fellmer, @Manuele Carlini, @Kirstin Siu, @Janina Abels, @Tais Real, @Bodhi Neiser, @Philip Engelbutzeder, @Be, @Joachim Thome, @Matthias Larisch, @Adrean L and @Manuel Waelder 

Notary/ies: @Douglas Webb

Location: Nürnberg

[Meeting begins: 17:50]

RF: We should recap over the money survey. Not too in depth (i.e. don't discuss basic income)

VD: General clarification... understand how we work with this topic

AL: Hope we can come to some common ground

MS: Clarification of personal views. Let us see and respect each others views.

ML: Work towards finding a clear pattern for individual use cases

JT: Nice exchange of view points. Not to make any decisions.

BG: Discuss results of survey and see what conclusions there are and that we don't repeat ourselves. Move forwards

DW: Release any tensions, don't make decisions, know how to move forward.

PE: Start process where we can discuss opinions here and remotely and generally getting things more concrete. Get aim in focus.

TR: Curious to get overview of perspectives and discuss practical examples.

BN: Look at overview/meta level to see what we can have concrete guidelines for

JA: To see what the extreme (and mild) viewpoint are.

KS: No major expectation

MC: What are the scope and value of yunity? I don't think the scope is to be moneyless, but could be a value. More important that we enable what we need: some people get paid to do work, other do it for nothing. 'We use money for the connection we don't have'.

BG: We should be honest whatever we do: if we say moneyless, we're moneyless, if not, not. Also, getting funding is not easy - we need to make a decision on this if we're considering funding.

DW: Let's figure out why we have any reservations to money at all - we have not explicitly made this clear anywhere. Let's collect these.

BN: Think WuppHaus should be open, if people have to work to be there it's not so good.

PE: I don't think the goal is to be moneyless, but rather an outcome of sharing unconditionally.

JT: Talks about his points from the last money talk: https://yunity.atlassian.net/wiki/display/YUN/2016-02-05+-+Talk+about+money?moved=true

PE: Important to have proportionality with expenditure. The WuppHaus seems reasonable - what about pasta? Informal agreement that WuppHaus is necessary. 

DW: General and specific... Presents proposal: https://yunity.atlassian.net/wiki/display/YUN/Dougs+proposal

TR: What about individual purchases?

BG: Discussing toilet paper vs pasta is very low level and inhibits the project. Whatever we do needs to take less time and effort. The aim should be to get the project done.

MC: Agrees with previous point. Differentiating projects: yunity (OS software project), WuppHaus (residential project), x, y & z.

BG: Strengths and weaknesses to spontaneity. 

MC: Transparent with group expenses, personal not important.

MW: Thinking of using social currency as a transition to no money. Something based on block-chain and what possibilities there are. A lot of people need the extra level of security.

RF: Like Dougs proposal, don't want to make a fuss - don't want money to hold us back

VD: Likes proposals. Doesn't see why we should limit ourselves: 'Manage the money, don't let the money manage us'

AL: Agreed with everything heard til now and looks forward to going through survey.

MS: Don't want to make a fuss: prefer fuzzy over sharp guidelines. Let's differentiate personal from group, good to have freedom. What are our dreams? We should be an example for others, that it's a tool and not a way of life.

ML: We should not limit ourselves with the policy.

JT: Have a feeling that money issue is heavy which is understandable. We shouldn't rush to conclusions. Like existing statement as a simple guideline. If we want to gather advantages and disadvantages we should. Let's be aware of subliminal stupidity. Let's keep the goal on the platform.

BG: Personally surprised that it's an issue. Hopefully a survey will help. Want to move on as not the main topic. Doesn't prevent us moving on.

DW: Looking forward to further working. Feeling good.

PE: Not feeling 100 %, there is a missing logic step. Primary objective: sharing unconditionally in real life. Using money goes against this. Don't want to fall into consumerist activity. Not sure about the existing money statement.

TR: Glad that people generally like proposal, let's work on it.

BN: We can work with proposal.

JA: Good that someone had put effort in, but unhappy that it is vague but also does not want to get lost in micro-management. More confused than sure.

KS: Feel less confused, actually good. Like proposal, work on it. Inspired by concept of relationships replacing money.

[Meeting ends: 19:20]