I would like briefly to respond to these comments from James and from
the rest of you who have expressed concern over the transition to a
Discussion board format:
First, the idea of restricting the forum to members isn't a new idea at
all. In fact, it's always been the policy. We just haven't enforced
it. We thought that with this changeover, it might be time to go ahead
and encourage people to renew their memberships.
Second, we are very sensitive to the concerns of people of limited means
who would like to participate in the continuing AML discussion.
Students can become members without paying a membership fee. In our
board meeting on Tuesday, we'll take up the issue of people who were
once student members, but who have graduated and find AML membership
dues a hardship, or who otherwise might find yourselves in straitened
circumstances. Believe me when I say that all of us remember very well
indeed what that was like. We don't in any way want to minimize the
difficulties some of you may be facing. And I also do not want to
restrict the conversation to those of our members who are financially
able to participate.
We've already seen one solution to this problem. Some of our members
who have the ability to do so have begun paying the dues for those who
aren't able to. We have heard from a few members already who have
quietly asked if they can help out some of those who need assistance.
If anyone on the List feels able to help out in this way,that would be
great. If others of you are really unable to pay dues, please let us
know. We want to work things out. You can email me, or anyone else on
the board. My private email is eric_samuelsen@???.
James wonders if the conversation will remain as vibrant and interesting
as it's been. I hope so. We wouldn't make this change if we weren't
convinced that it will facilitate an even better kind of discussion.
But as James so eloquently suggests, we need to try it and see if it
works. I hope it does.
Eric Samuelsen
________________________________
From: aml-list-bounces@???
[mailto:aml-list-bounces@???] On Behalf Of James
Goldberg
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 1:09 PM
To: aml-list@???
Subject: [AML] Re: AML Discussion Board
Knowing something of the behind-the-scenes work of a literary
non-profit, I am 100% convinced that the idea of restricting the forum
to members was not to "cash in." It's hard to make ends meet
financially, and yes, you have a certain obligation to members. So I do
not want to criticize Board decisions and I'm sure that the Board
carefully considers sizeable changes in policy like this. Whether the
decisions are actually best or not is irrelevant, I ultimately support
AML leaders in their decisions simply because I'm sure it's not easy to
be an AML leader.
That said, I will go ahead and throw my two cents in, just for your
consideration, understanding full well that I don't understand all the
issues.
I'm not sure you're going to be better serving your members by limiting
posts to members only. I mean, if doing so meant that the number of
dues-paying members increased, then yes, financially you'd have more
resources to serve members. But honestly, I don't think many people who
haven't been paying dues are going to start so that they can post the
board.
There is, though, the angle of being able to tell members that they are
getting an extra specific privelege out of their membership: their
ability to post on the Boards. So even if you don't get more members out
of the deal, your current members might feel better about being members.
That's not a bad thing.
The trouble is: what if the Board slips down in value as a result of the
sizeable exodus away from it? Are the people who are already members
going to feel better served by the fact that they have the special
privelege to post if that also means the forum no longer includes half
(my guess at the fraction is a shot in the dark) of their old list
friends? Are there going to be as many interesting posts with just the
members left? I don't know, but it is, maybe, something to consider.
The best, from an organizational perspective, that I think would happen
would be if people did decide to join and pay dues just for forum access
(probably unlikely), the quality of forum discussions stayed the same or
improved (thoroughly possible, although the volume of discussion will
almost definitely dramatically decrease) and members really enjoy that
feeling of exclusivity they get from their members-only forum (I have no
idea about that).
The worst, from an organizational perspective that could happen is: no
one new joins just for the forum, the forum just isn't the same with the
lower participation levels and missing voices, the members are sad that
it's just not like it used to be and feel less served than before, and
less people find out that AML even exists because they don't have that
email list anymore. AML loses a proselyting tool, as it were. (I can
think of at least a few dozen people who heard about AML for the first
time b/c I was telling stories about discussions on the list...that's
mostly just vague awareness, though. Only one or two joined the list,
mostly as lurkers, and I doubt any formally joined AML, so maybe it
doesn't matter. On the other hand, I heard about AML because of the list
and I like to think that even though I've never paid dues or formally
signed up, my posts have been appreciated and valued by at least a few
paying members. And I don't buy Irreantum, but I do read it in the
Library now and then, and I probably would not have found it if I hadn't
first been told about the list.)
Anyway...my advice for the Board would be: go ahead and try out the
restricted forum for a while, but if the results are looking more like a
worst-case than best-case scenario, send out another email to everyone
on the old list and tell us we're all invited back.
I, for one, couldn't dream of holding months away from the forum against
you or resenting the experiment in any way.
Best of luck with wherever the changes take you. Goodbye (again) for
now, and maybe I'll hear from you later.
-James
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 11:46:50 -0600
From: "K Morris" < quiteso@??? <mailto:quiteso@???>
>
Subject: Re: [AML] AML Discussion Board
To: "AML Discussion List" <aml-list@???>
Message-ID:
<
bd0260430710261046xdc4ac41pa13093502fe72f56@???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Marianne (and others),
Thanks for expressing your concerns. You're conflating two
issues into one,
however. The AML board did not decide to move the discussion to
another
forum in order to charge people for using it. They (1) decided
to move the
discussion to a new forum and (2) discussed how this forum could
benefit
members. You have to understand that while our commitment is to
Mormon
letters in general, we also have an obligation to official
members of AML.
The AML membership fee is not so AML can make money, believe me.
It's used
to provide services to people who are committed to AML. That is
the
perspective the board is coming from. We do, however, want to
hear from
people who are concerned about our policies and
policies-in-the-making, and
we are willing to make changes. Our approach to the AML annual
conference,
for example, has changed in the past year. For those of you who
don't know,
the AML annual conference was free for members this year. This
year the
writer's conference is free for students. Obviously not all of
our members
can benefit from these conferences since not all live in Utah
Valley.
However, we are making efforts to improve the other services we
provide,
namely *Irreantum*, the AML annuals, and our Web site. The
registration fee
is not for the AML-list. It's for membership in AML, which
brings with it
certain benefits.
Again, thanks for expressing your concerns. As a college student
with a full
load of classes and barely enough time for a part-time job, I
empathize with
your financial concerns. I would hate to see anyone feel like
they've been
"turned away" from the list because of money. That was
absolutely not our
intention.
Regards,
Katherine Morris
