From the PMs I see I wasn't clear. I sent the message to the President, VP and Treasurer; then posted it here. Only response was from the treasurer, who wasn't having a good day. I'm not looking for solutions here, although solutions may be forthcoming. I'd like to see a test of National Matches in places other than EG. The CBA has 1 NM per year, at ranges in East, Midwest and West. This year it was Fairfax, next year Kansas City, etc. These ranges vary, means east isn't always Fairfax. ASSRA could have ex spring match in ex WA state. The object to make NM participation larger, easier access for some. A test. I'd like to see the archives question/s be defined, and a set of folks assigned to the solution/s. Electronic data storage and distribution goes a long way toward easing space and access requirements. This needs attention by computer, data and library knowledgable folk. I think. There's talk of making past issues of The Fouling Shot (CBA) available on CD, however there are opponents. Maybe a collaborative effort? I'd like to see a place for alternative suggestions in the Journal. A place where the suggestions of the loyal opposition can be presented to the members. One of these alternatives might have to do with the emphasis on E.G., and the amount of $$ spent there. Could the $$ go somewhere else to the advantage of more members? I'd like to see the members get to vote on future actions, after alternatives are presented in the Journal. We don't know who the candidates for office are, we have no opinions on these candidates, and we don't want to vote for them. We do, maybe, want to vote on actions, ACTIONS, such as buying additional land around EG to keep the range safe from complainers-and we want(maybe) to know the financial story. It's time for a test. I've been extremely careful not to criticise the Journal or the Editor during the various transitions. That's over. Starting with the Campbell days I saw the Journal-the only thing that I and many other members see for our dues-get glossy and in color and lose content. It looks good, but there ain't much inside. I'd rather see equipment lists (almost anything) than copied reports of what happened in S.F. in 1903 or whenever it was. In the good old days we had a B&W cheap paper interesting magazine, probably printed at much lower cost, that was interesting. Give me interesting, pay the authors with the money saved by cutting out the glossy and color. It's not interesting, it's awful. This, of course, is just my opinion. Not a criticism of the present or last editor, who merely followed the Campbell trail. I'll write this up for the Journal and send it to John M. joe b.
|