This was an unexpectedly wonderful video. As one of the comments on the video says:
‘So let me get this straight…this enterprise employs those who might have trouble finding a job due to mental health issues, it diverts technological waste from the environment, it’s helping revitalize a struggling community, and it makes much-needed technology available to people who otherwise couldn’t afford it. This is what guardian angels look like.’
Yep. Simplicity itself. I hope the local mental health services are promoting this and other community initiatives. This tells sufferers they have a value that many have thought long since lost.
Great job.
If only The Guardian had a website that was open to all internet users to view this interesting content rather than reverting to the bad old days of AOL, CompuServe and walled gardens. 
Shame. It sounds like an interesting link and this is why I dislike Facebook.
That is annoying.
This is a link to their main page series:
They do, it’s at www.theguardian.com
You can use a website called Google to search for content on it.
You either mistaken or deliberately missed my point yet verified it in the process.
My point is why link to a closed source when trying to share information? The very fact that this information is posted on the source’s own website, in this case The Guardian, why make people go looking for it? Or require membership and a login to view it?
Much easier to post post direct to source when sharing information that may be if interest to others.
Many thanks! 
I wanted to watch that before I went to work ( but couldn’t use the original link).
Having got back, I’ve watched it and it is really interesting. Having lived in Stoke-on-Trent for a few years, and working with people with mental health challenges, it’s really interesting to see what they’re doing there but frustrating to see how their good work lives on an income knife-edge.
It is more valuable for The Guardian for you to consume their content on Facebook because they can monetise your membership of that social network, despite their commitment to free and accessible journalism.
In my particular case, it is of no value at all to either of them as I am not a member of Facebook and Facebook prevented me from seeing The Guardian content.
Which is why I simply answered your original question:
It doesn’t matter that you’re not a member of Facebook, you can view The Guardian’s website for free. Any ‘point’ you were making was not clear.
With respect, you’ve missed the point I was trying to make.
If posting information that you wish to share it is preferable to post a link to a source that is open for all to view rather than one that is only available to a closed membership.