1. Opening

Geoff stated that he had convened an extraordinary meeting of the Committee following a development on the Neocities website platform which required a decision regarding the Chapel’s authority to approve external websites.

The meeting was called at short notice, as the individual concerned was awaiting a response.

2. Background

Geoff reported that the Chapel’s Neocities account had recently followed a website operating under the name irrelevantreviews.

The website’s proprietor had subsequently published a message expressing surprise at being followed by a chapel and asking whether this entitled them to describe their website as officially approved by the Chapel of St Letus Salata.

Geoff confirmed that no formal application for approval had been submitted. However, the question had been raised publicly, and he considered that a failure to respond might create uncertainty regarding the Chapel’s position.

The Committee agreed that the matter should be considered.

3. Authority to Approve External Websites

The Committee discussed whether the Chapel possessed the authority to approve websites over which it had no operational responsibility.

It was observed that no existing Chapel regulation expressly prohibited such approvals.

Geoff further noted that the Chapel was not proposing to assume responsibility for the website, merely to approve of it by way of gentle nod.

Stephen asked whether the Committee had inspected the website. Geoff confirmed that he had visited it, although no formal inspection report had been prepared.

The Committee agreed that a formal inspection would introduce an unnecessary delay.

It was therefore resolved that the Chapel was competent to issue approval to external websites, provided that such approval did not involve the transfer of funds, property or administrative responsibility.

4. Consideration of irrelevantreviews

The Committee considered the website irrelevantreviews.

Geoff reported that the website was accessible through Neocities, and had not caused the Chapel any known difficulties in the past.

No objections were raised.

The Committee agreed that the website had demonstrated sufficient suitability for approval, particularly given that its proprietor had specifically requested it.

Decision: The website irrelevantreviews was granted official approval by the Chapel of St Letus Salata, effective immediately.

5. Evidence of Approval

Geoff raised the question of how the website proprietor might demonstrate that approval had been granted.

It was agreed that a verbal assurance would be insufficient, particularly where third parties might question whether a chapel had the necessary authority to issue such an approval.

The Committee therefore authorised the creation of an official approval badge.

The badge would be made available for display on the approved website, together with an explanation of the entitlements associated with it.

There was a brief discussion regarding whether an expiry date should be included.

It was agreed that no expiry date was necessary, as this would create additional administrative work.

Action: Geoff to issue the badge and publish the accompanying guidance.

6. Future Applications

The Committee acknowledged that other website proprietors might seek similar approval once the arrangement became known.

It was agreed that any such requests would be considered individually, although the Committee did not consider it necessary to establish a standing approvals subcommittee at this stage.

Geoff was asked to retain a record of approvals issued.

A suggestion that the Chapel might eventually require an application form was deferred pending evidence of demand.

7. Communication of Decision

Geoff was authorised to respond publicly to irrelevantreviews, confirming that the Committee had considered the matter and granted approval.

The response was to include the location of the badge and an explanation of how it could be used.

8. Close

There being no further business, the meeting was closed.

The Committee expressed satisfaction that the matter had been dealt with promptly and without the need for refreshments.

Minutes prepared by: Geoff

Status: Decision implemented; no further Committee action required.

Approval means that the Chapel Committee is happy for the website upon which the badge is placed, to be described as being Chapel Approved. It is a modest indication of approval and does not mean that we have read every page or agree with everything on it.

Conditions of use

The badge, an explanation and placement instructions are published at:

Officially Chapel Approved

Websites following, or followed by, the Chapel may apply to display the badge. Once authorised, the badge can be accessed by using the embed code available at the link. Please remember that this is a website badge only, and it confers no parking entitlement to the site owner.

Register

Websites which have not yet received authorisation should continue to display the Not Chapel Approved badge. Submission of an application does not, in itself, constitute approval..

Geoff Thomas
Caretaker & website relationships maintenance operative

Awarded for its attention to public notices, complaints administration and the protection of staff engaged in paperwork.

Particular commendation is given for requiring visitors to wipe their feet and for the notice concerning a gentleman who complained about the parking of his own horse.

We also recognise the position of the member of staff who deals with problems despite their falling outside her responsibilities. Doing something once should not mean it becomes your job permanently.

Geoff Thomas
Caretaker, website relationships maintenance operative, committee secretary & honours and awards member

1. Public Consultation 2

Geoff reported that all four respondents to the question about how they had found the Chapel website had selected Neocities.

Stephen clarified that this described the four answers received, rather than every visitor to the website. Geoff confirmed that he was reporting the consultation result and had not claimed to have interviewed the entire internet.

The Committee agreed that Neocities was proving useful in bringing people to the website and should be developed as a way of encouraging physical visits to the Chapel.

Glyn said the next stage should be to give people a reason to come through the door. Geoff said the website already contained several reasons, together with directions.

It was agreed that future Neocities updates should draw attention to suitable Chapel events, visiting arrangements and refreshments. Readers living further away could continue to take part online; no assumption should be made that every follower was able to visit weekly.

2. Monitoring follower numbers

Geoff proposed that the Chapel’s Neocities follower count should be monitored closely, so that the Committee could see whether its efforts were increasing interest.

Glyn asked whether the number was currently going up. Geoff said he believed it was, but that a proper record would allow him to answer without having to remember the previous number. (Ed - It was 0 last month, and it's more than that now, so it is going up)

Stephen noted that an increase in followers would demonstrate an increase in interest only.
Physical attendance would still need to be recorded separately.

It was agreed that Geoff would record the follower total monthly and report changes to the Committee.

Where practical, physical visitors would be invited to say how they had heard about the Chapel. This could be recorded on a dedicated page in Geoff's chapel notebook.

3. Proposed register

Geoff proposed a Register of Neocities Following Websites, containing the names and addresses of websites following the Chapel.

He explained that this would provide a clear record of the sites making up the following.

Geoff said he did not intend this in a creepy way.

Glyn asked what would be entered in the register. Geoff proposed the website name, Neocities address and the date it was first recorded as following. Where the actual follow date was not known, the date of observation would be used.

Stephen asked whether inclusion would imply Chapel approval of the website. The committee agreed that it would pre-approve the owner as being entitled to a badge, but they would still need to apply. The Committee agreed that a separate register should continue to be maintained for chapel approved badges so they could be more easily controlled.

Glyn supported the proposal, provided maintaining the register did not take priority over encouraging people to attend. Geoff said the two activities were connected, although he accepted that completing the register would not itself compel anyone to travel to the chapel itself.

The register was approved.

Actions

Following websites

The dates above record entry in this register, not the original dates of following.
Websites are listed alphabetically by Neocities account name; the order does not indicate seniority.

It is unclear how we will continue to sort the sites by number and in alphabetical order going forward.

Entitlement to Chapel Approved badge

All those associated with sites in the register are entitled to display a Chapel Approved badge on their site.

There is no requirement to do so, however, these approved websites are now explicitly forbidden from displaying the standard Not Chapel Approved badge and must remove it immediately.

Chapel Approved badges will be issued on application only. This allows the committee to track them effectively using the existing Register of Chapel Approved Websites.

Follower totals

Maintenance

The public follower list and total will be checked monthly. Changes will be reported to the Committee.

Physical attendance and visitors’ accounts of how they heard about the Chapel will be recorded separately.
No attendance has been inferred from following.

Source: Chapel’s public Neocities follower list.

Geoff Thomas
Caretaker & website maintainer