How to ensure that the mapping stays focused on the Alternatives to the prevailing economic system?

In other words: How do we deal with the risk of the map not becoming a tool for “green washing”?

Taxonomy Group Proposal: You will perceive, that we work with three main groups of categories: needs, mode of interaction and self-identification of a community.
The only category-group, that is mandatory is “self-identification of a community”. You have several options to choose from or you can add a new one. This way we make sure, that the many alternative communities out there can watch the test-mapping process and in case there is an abuse point to it publicly.

we need to work on this to reflect the whole of TransforMap (different tools, work in progress, etc.) xTODO

We are working on a lightweight label procedure for initiatives, including a revocation procedure, if ultimately necessary. The planned steps are “registered”, “peer-controlled” to “audited”. Several indicators are allowed to generate a rating, which is either crowd based or e.g. by a procedure with “The Economy of the Common Good” (Gemeinwohlökonomie).

@rasos Interesting. Could you provide some links ?

The labelling procedure is not yet on paper.
We had two meetings in Zurich together with Swiss initiatives, hosted by DANACH.info. Goal is to launch a process of intense networking and reach a “next level” of visibility of sustainability in society. I have documented the current status here: http://ethify.org/fairvita (in german). We’ll meet again on Saturday 25 April 2015 in Vorarlberg in a smaller group, where we will work on the label and a light organisational structure of a metanetwork.
Here is an English version (and please vote for getting funding!): https://advocate-europe.eu/en/idea-space#!/r/mercator/FairVITA_LabelandMeta-NetworkfortransitioninitiativesinEurope2277/VERSION_0000003

hey @rasos: nice to see newbees, welcome! Would be great if you could take 30 sec to introduce yourself in our Who’s who? Thanks a lot!