[NAFEX] electronic and membership discussion
bmn at iglou.com
Sat Feb 16 11:55:56 EST 2008
Claude, I'm not sure I follow. My statements below were meant to
illustrate the requirements of the audience we need to reach. To that
end, the needless fluff that happens on a number of sites is
unnecessary. Many of these gadets are often vanities for code writers'
prowess as they serve little to no real function. Most are forced...in
that I mean you have to suffer through them through no action on your
own other than having landed on a site. Access to content is not
enhanced. I want to be clear and note that I'm not advocating giving up
all tools and becoming luddites. I'm not limiting the discussion to the
simple matter of online distribution of Pomona either. I'm also not
suggesting there is any difference between memberships if someone
decides to choose one distribution form over another. They would simply
be choices on MAY make.
I agree this is not age-related.
I do not understand where you are getting anything about putting
organizational goals and objectives on hold. Please inform. I thought
I'd said how we were moving according to plan. I also don't understand
the "alarmist warnings that the changes may cause some people to not
renew" aspect. I'd be happy to explain what I meant. I'm just not sure
where that comes from just yet. Can you give me a bit of detail?
Claude Sweet wrote:
> All that is necessary is to list the requirement of having a minimum
> connection speed, hardware, and software that the user should have to
> utilize the electronic membership.
> Logic would assume that individuals who LACK the necessary requirements
> would not pay for the electronic membership.
> There will always be people who do not want to become part of the
> computer age and others that have a comfort zone with technology that
> they will not change. This is not necessarily age related.
> Putting an organizations goals and objectives on hold because of
> alarmist warnings that the changes may cause some people to not renew
> has been used as a reason to prevent increases in membership dues for as
> long as I can remember.
> Claude Sweet
> San Diego, CA
> Jwlehman at aol.com wrote:
>> In a message dated 2/15/2008 7:18:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>> bmn at iglou.com writes:
>>> This is paramount. Web stats and surveys show that while many folks
>>> have broadband, the majority do not. Add to that that most rural areas
>>> are on dialup or have shared slow service and it is clear than bandwidth
>>> hog websites might be pretty, but they quickly cut off most of their
>>> intended market. We'll be going for easily maneuvered content
>>> primarily. We'll make other stuff available for folks who have
>>> broadband and those who don't mind waiting, bu there will definately be
>>> no splash pages, few java applications, no animations, etc.
>>> Additionally, it should work a simply as possible due to software issues
>>> as well. While many of us do have newer software packages (me
>>> included), many of us do not like the resource hogs newer software
>>> versions have become (me included) and for no real good reason. I'm not
>>> a person who favors bells and whistles when they don't make sense and
>>> detract from site usability.
More information about the nafex