To the List and Society
Here are some more of my thoughts on the format of the Bulletins in light
of some responses I have been reading during this discussion. I am
responding to comments rather than to individuals but wish to give credit
where it's due, too. So don't take offense or break your arm patting
yourself on the back either. Thanks to all for keeping this on a
gentlemanly level as an exchange of ideas and opinion, at least thusfar. I
feel it is healthy to bring this up for no other reason than the powers
that be within the society get some hopefully welcome feedback from the
membership.
Rob Adams <aaeditor@n...> wrote:
>You gentlemen bring up an issue for which there probably isn't a
>"one-size-fits-all" solution.
My immediate response to this is that the "one-size-fits-all" solution is
very obvious and was well defined by Kim Zach <kzach@e...> who
wrote"
>...I would much prefer the Society do something along the lines of the Soo
>Line and/or Milwaukee Road publications:
>>>> possibly with one major topic and >several side subjects.<<<<
This would/should appeal to _everyone_ IMHO.
Kim goes on to say:
>...and I shouldn't say anything unless I have something to contribute myself
Well this is the standard response whenever someone complains about
anything in a volunteer organization, the NMRA has raised it to an art
form. Of course there is some validity to it but it is a discussion
killer. The other side of the coin is that some people can, do and should
write. Others can't for whatever reason. It may sound cold and
insensitive but if a person is a dues paying member of any organization,
they should expect to get something for their dues dollar that they feel is
of value to them and shouldn't get shut down if they dare to question the
status quo. I see this constantly. I guess what it comes down to is do we
feel we are being served by the organization we are paying to support and
do these things. Apparently my friend didn't feel he was getting, shall
we say, his money's worth. Of course the exhorbitant one time ten dollar
annual dues increase, which is a whole different thread I haven't even seen
mentioned here yet, probably didn't help keep him a member either. And I
don't know if I blame him. He wasn't getting what he wanted and it was
going to cost him more in the future not to get it.
Remember, writing a lot of what _they_ want us to know about doesn't
automatically mean we are getting what _we_ want to know about. Keep in
mind the other side of the coin would be "we don't know what the members
want if they don't tell us." So I am telling you. I encourage others to
do so as well. It's just common sense to me.
Jim Zach also stated:
>It's obvious from the quality of every Bulletin that an extraordinary
amount of >research and hard work goes into it
I couldn't agree more lest you think me too critical. But maybe it is a
case of putting all the eggs into the one proverbial basket.
Here are some more statements from Rob Adams <aaeditor@n...> :
>Assembling publications year-in and year-out is a great deal of effort,
and no >matter how well you do it, nor how capable you are at turning the
publications >out on schedule, there will always be some contingent of the
membership that is
>disappointed.
And the way the Society is doing it, IMO, is disappointing the greatest
number of the membership. Not in quality certainly, but simply by serving
the smallest amount of them as possible at any one time. In other words, I
or any single member or contingent may _someday_ be ecstatically happy when
that one Bulletin comes out that addresses that topic(s) we have an
interest in. But that could literally take years and some of us feel like
we are shooting craps - pay your money and take your chances what the topic
in the Bulletin will be this year: Burlington toilet bowls across the
system - D'oh, crapped out again. Well, maybe next year. I'm just saying
put out a newsletter with something of interest to many, by having articles
dealing with various topics, rather than an annual dealing typically with
only one topic. The overwhelming odds are you are alienating the greatest
amount of _dues paying_ members simply by doing it the way it is now. I
have heard the problem with the Burlington Route Historical Society, is
that they are too Historical!
Rob goes on to say:
>Being a modeler myself, I always come at it from the modeler's perspective
in that >I try to include material and data that would allow someone to
model that >particular scene or equipment. The history is very important
and the "real-life" >stories and reflections make the material all the more
interesting and enjoyable, >but I always attempt to make sure that the
modeler's needs are also taken into >account...If possible, I also create
scale drawings of structures (or if I'm lucky, >another member will created
them). This approach has drawn very favorable >feedback from the AARRT&HA
membership, ...generally pleases the freight car >historians and modelers
in a big way....and I've been very pleased with how >these issues turn out.
Just by making this extra effort he has caught the interest of many more
members to what otherwise could be a dry subject to all but a few. This
greatly expands the usefullness of the article beyond just a historical
perspective with limited interest to the greatest number of the membership.
Rob continues:
>Another thing that I've done several times is to take an interesting photo
showing >a yard scene or part of a freight train on the Ann Arbor, and go
through car by car >with concise suggestions for how to model them (i.e.
what model to use, what >modifications are needed, what decals to use,
etc.). In spite of all the detail in >the modeling press today, members
seem to really like this, since it is a prototype >scene set in time and
place from "your railroad name goes here".
Rob sound like he should be writing for the BRHS. He has my vote. Or at
least as a consultant to how to reach the greatest number of readers'
interest.
AND...
>Are all the AARRT&HA members happy at once? Probably very rarely.
Well realistically you will never satisfy everyone all of the thime, but
it looks like the needs of many more are being addressed than a very
limited few as is the case with the current state of affairs with the
Bulletin.
And finally from Rob...
>First, I think that the BRHS, (just like the AARRT&HA, WRHS, C&OHS, and
every >other group I've belonged to) needs to do a better job of sharing
information >outside the regular forum of its publications. THE GOAL: to
make prototype >information i.e. maps, copy photos, diagrams, drawings,
etc.(and particularly that >from archives and collections which belong to a
society and were donated by >current and former members) MUCH more readily
available to members .
Keep those single page diagrams, consist information, and standard drawings
coming!
>Obviously, there will be costs (and risks) associated with doing this, but
the >benefits will be reaped in many ways and in my mind the long-term
welfare of the >society will be greatly enhanced.
Couldn't agree more. Let's get the information with the greatest potential
of interest to the largest amount of members out there _on a regular
basis_ rather than the other way around. Believe me, this will be of the
greatest service to the majority of the membership as a whole and should
keep them coming back for more on a continuing basis. They might not even
mind the dues increase, 'cause more of their needs and interests are being
met on a regular basis.
Thanks to all who have done an excellent job on the Bulletin thusfar, but
my vote is to start making them special editions for sale while sending the
regular, majority of the membership more timely and useful newsletters
three or fours times a year.
Sincererly,
Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA
NMRA, BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club
Modeling the CB&Q & Illiniwek River Branch in HO - Circa early fall, 1969.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|