Message From Anner Whitehead

[John Jones <jijones@usjoneses.com>]

Greetings.
 
I'd like to emerge briefly to comment on the matter of "electronic membership" generally, and the digitized Bulletins initiative, so splendidly conducted by John. I'd also like to touch on some scraps involving communication.
 
First, since candor seems to be the order of the day, permit me to me offer a jaded comment about some AIS LIfe Members. As AIS Membership Secretary, I initiated a Life Member census to clarify the status of every Life Membership on the rolls. This was an interesting experience, not only because we managed to cull from the mailing list deceased members who had been receiving the Bulletin for years, but also from the standpoint of my gaining insight into the level of cooperation to be expected between the Membership Office and the RVPs, and AIS members generally.
 
Some people saw the point of the whole process immediately--they understood that it was about conserving finite resources--meaning saving money--and did their part cheerfully. While the Overseas Life Members were especially helpful, the American Life Members turned out to be a real mixed bag, with some feeling that any inquiry into the question of their well being was an insult, as if they were being accused of having died and not told someone in AIS about it. But what I also noticed --and here is my point--is that some individuals believed that having selected the more economical AIS Life Membership option was tantamount to buying themselves into an aristocracy within the society, so that preferential treatment was an expectation to which they were entitled. This, I confess, was startling.
 
The question of whether encouraging purchase of Life Memberships makes sense for AIS at this time is not one which I can answer, but I doubt it is a good idea ever to encourage the Life Members to think of themselves as a uniquely privileged elite. All that said, I think that if you wish to encourage people to buy Life Memberships, making the Emembership part of the package seems to be a reasonable thing to do.  As a concomitant of this, I support conferring Ememberships on the existing Life Members gratis, as Dana in her bold and cogent note suggested, with the clearly articulated intent of maintaining parity among all the Life Members.
 
Second. while I have some experience dealing with the intricacies of Membership Policy, I do not, myself, find the situation with the Electronic Membership option to be immediately apprehensible, or intuitive. Let me tell you what I, as one lone AIS member am experiencing, and how I feel about it. Real case study, eh?
 
I have a traditional membership, at least for now. If AIS does not solve the problem of getting my Bulletin to me intact, and solve it soon, that will probably be the end of that. I have not had a copy arrive in presentable shape since the plastic was abandoned, and I am not having this same trouble with other magazine I subscribe to.
 
Now, my own unique personal contribution to furthering the AIS mission these days is in the form of research, typically of seminal topics, which I write up for one or another publication if I learn something interesting enough to be shared, or needing to be put on the record. In this process, I need access to information, and over the years achieving access to some of AIS' own publications has taxed my ingenuity and financial resources; accordingly, I greet the digitization of the Bulletin with very loud and merry huzzahs! Hooray for AIS! Hooray for all of us who want to learn things, or cogitate, or simply read!  This is so important! Thank you, AIS Foundation! Hoorah for you, too!
 
But I think Dana is right, and I think Gary is right. Whereas your position is entirely defensible, I think you have created a confusing situation--where the traditional member feels he or she is being forced to choose, or buy duplicate services--buying the Bulletin in two forms is the rub---to enjoy these new digital resources.
 
I don't use the Iris Register-- have not needed to yet-- but some of those Bulletins are of interest. I find my choices exasperating. There is a sense, you see, of not being allowed to ADD TO, my AIS membership, but being compelled to BUY TWO AIS memberships. As Gary rightly intuits, this apparent choice does not sit well with me. This is just one more little subjective factor that may impact my decision to renew my AIS membership, or not.
 
I think this is what I would suggest:
 
1) Life Members, new and existing, should enjoy access to all AIS electronic resources at no further expense to them--or to AIS. If you are loosing money on LIfe Memberships, or anticipate doing so, raise the price, or stop selling them.
 
2) There should be two types of AIS memberships: Traditional, and Electronic. Dues do not have to be the same for both.
 
a) The Traditional member should receive a hard copy Bulletin and access to Iris Register.
 
b) The Electronic member a PDF Bulletin and access to Iris Register.
 
And then there should be the 3) AIS Digital Library Option, available to both categories of members, for an additional annual fee, to give access to all digitatl files, including, at this time, the historic Bulletins. John no doubt has other things he's planning on adding to the stash. AIS Digital Library. Get Silverberg to keep an eye out for materials to upload, too. 
 
Now, changing the subject. I noticed the thread on "apathy." If I may be so bold, I think it would be a gross error to scold the membership in the Bulletin, or to engage in extravagant public hand wringing, or to suggest in the organ that the Society is in any way a sinking ship or a loosing proposition. I think it is far better--meaning more salubrious-- to speak to people's higher selves, to encourage participation and constructive behavior through positive example and encouraging a spirit of participation.
 
You know, of course, that it is not "communication" per se which is the eternal AIS problem: it is failure, in some cases refusal, to cooperate, and so to carry forth the duties which have been assumed.  I don't know how you are to deal with this. It was an ongoing challenge to me when I held office, so much so that told myself I'd never in this life take on any other AIS job in which my being able to get my work done was dependient upon someone else coming through for me. Sad, really. 
 
There seems to be no mechanism in place to deal with people who dither or drop the ball through lack of a sense of duty, or incompetence, or those who make it impossible for others to get anything accomplished through nonfeasance or malfeasance or sheer bloodymindedness or misdirected competitiveness. I have concluded that the social structure of AIS is likely to be at the root of this. Because no one wants to be unpopular, or talked about, or risk ructions, so no one will challenge the parties who are the actual cancer at the core of things. People in their frustration may, and will, backstab, gossip, whine to anyone who will listen, but they won't confront,and they do not, so far as I know, have a formal policy and procedure in place for registering complaints, short of ratting others out to the sitting President--- who may or may not be brave enough to risk being unpopular, either.
 
Once upon a time there was an AIS Ombudsman; do you still need one?  
 
Well, another novella from Anner. So be it. It's been a while since I participated on the AISDiscuss, and I did want to bustle on over to speak in principle in support of Dana's recognizing her duty and doing it, and to salute Gary's crisp forthrightness.  
 
Cordially,
 
Anner M. Whitehead

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
<aissecretary@irises.org>
The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/