Folks,
This is your President speaking. First off, I have been watching this
exchange with much interest (as has most of the BOD). I have deliberately
held back on commenting on the subject until this point. I am offering MY
opinions on this issue below (though I feel I know most of the BOD's feelings
on this subject)
First off, congratulations on keeping this discourse civil and intelligent.
I belong to many other lists where this would not be the case. I don't blame
Paul for bringing up the subject for serious discussion. In fact, there was
a time many years ago when we went a period of several years where there was
not one Bulletin that interested me. Though they were very nice, well done
Bulletins, I had no interest in the subject matter.
A society dedicated to the Q (a large railroad that lasted a long time) has a
lot of ground to cover. We know we cannot always satisfy 1600 publication
receiving constituents specific interests. So what is a society to do? One
of the core decisions, is what the society's publication philosophy will be.
Our philosophy, is that the Zephyr, published two times a year, is to be a
vehicle for society information, historical information, new products, and
questions and answers. We try to cover all issues that are time sensitive
and would be out of place in the Bulletin (which back issues get sold
constantly and really is a "timeless" sort of publication).
The Bulletin is designed to be a historical recording of Burlington Route
information, issued two times a year. It has developed into a predominately
through, one-topic analysis of a Burlington subject. This is not always the
case - recent examples are Bulletins 34 and 36, both multi-topic issues. Our
philosophy, though, is to take the amount of pages necessary to cover a topic
and to do it correctly.
We look at the Bulletin as a way to record as much information on the topic
as we can. We do not view the Bulletin as a newsletter or a collection of
short stories on the railroad. This is a decision that has been made by the
BOD and the editor of the Bulletin. This separates the BRHS from other
societies. It may not satisfy everyone, but this is our philosophy.
So to address Paul's concerns, what can be done? The society is very open to
publishing separate data sheets, short topics in the Zephyr (see the
discussion on the pattern domes in the last Zephyr) or even small stand-alone
publications on a subject (see the Red Oak Depot story). These will not come
from Hol or Mike, though. They are tied up with their primary
responsibilities - the Zephyr and the Bulletin. It is up to the members to
start developing material that can be edited and published by the society.
Let's look at the state of the society. Through the course of my involvement
with the society, there have never been more than 15 people (at any given
time) that do anything to make the society run. I can assure you that we
will not be taking on more responsibility. We have immense problems just
providing the core services (I will discuss just how far the dues you pay
goes in a later post). The bottom line is, though, that we can only do more
with your help.
I realize that this sounds cold and cynical, but unfortunately, it is the
truth. Your dues do indeed entitle you to something of "value". We are
trying to provide that with the Bulletin. Zephyr, the calendar, and the other
data we provide in the mailings. We also realize that people will "vote with
their dollars" and choose whether to remain in the society or not. We hope
that we are providing valuable information to the members. Our membership
numbers seem to confirm this.
Again, Paul's concerns are valid. This post is not looking for "atta boy's"
for the wonderful job ;-) we are doing. I am just trying to explain our
philosophy. I would welcome continued intelligent discourse on this topic.
One of the benefits of the BRHSList is that we now have more contact and
exchange than we ever had.
Rich Gortowski
President - BRHS
|