It's quite common for organisations like the S...

2009-06-22T13:21:07.658+01:00

It's quite common for organisations like the STC to focus inwardly, worrying about the machinations of how they work rather than WHY they exist (for the members).

And sometimes things need to die to be reborn anew with renewed vigour and purpose.

I started writing a comment, and it grew… so I end...

2009-06-22T01:08:21.158+01:00

I started writing a comment, and it grew… so I ended up writing my own blog post in response.

I agree with all your points. As a semi-detached m...

2009-06-21T20:30:45.596+01:00

I agree with all your points. As a semi-detached member I sympathise but have to admit I don't care too much: if the organisation folds I'll be abstractly sorry but happy to repocket the hundred dollars or so they ask for - in my case - no benefit apart from some badly-organised mailing list discussion groups, lots of irritating hustings and calls to vote for people I don't know to do things I don't much care about.

Now, I guess this could become an extremely useful organisation, as in 'the world needs some place where science/tech communicators can help one another, advance their art/profession, and find some sort of collective voice.' Maybe it once was.

For now it needs two things: a bunch of enthusiastic elected people who 'get' post-web organisation, and a secretariat/support staff which is small, dispersed and focused on membership benefits.

The Board is going to have to understand and implement this if they care about the future. If they don't, most of us ordinary members will just wander off without regret.

Comments on The Blockhead Blog: Does the STC deserve to survive?

It's quite common for organisations like the S...

I started writing a comment, and it grew… so I end...

I agree with all your points. As a semi-detached m...