[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Index by Month]

Re: [AGA-mcm] ACA Spy Report, lessons to learn #126, "purpose of the convention"



I guess the original reason I forwarded this e-mail was to point out (by analogy) that it's easy to veer off into tangents and concentrate on odd problems, and forget the purpose of why we're trying to put on the convention. And I think we've all now proven that point today, as we've all now veered completely onto not even our own tangent, but another club's... I think I regret the original posting now, sorry!

  - Erik

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, Larry Lampert wrote:

The whole ACA members and worse non-members selling
fish out of the room thing has been discussed ad
naseum on many lists. It really is not a problem for
us (AGA) yet.

Unfortunately, there is no easy answer. We as a club
either AGA or ACA can not regulate what someone does
in their private hotel room. We do not have the right
nor the means or desire to do so.

The only thing we can do is try to ensure that
everyone in the hotel is a registered club member and
do not let people advertise their lists on hotel
doors, etc.

The alternative is we just accept it and sell
advertising space on a board in the lobby like the ACA
does. I don't think this would be a good move for us
at this point. We don't have a problem yet why would
we want to create it?


Yes, there is money to be made selling fish. No IMO we
do not have a "better sense of community" than the
ACA. Just look at all of the grumbling from this years
convention. As we get bigger we can expect more of it.
People tend to like to complain more than they like to
work to change things. However, the ACA certainly has
it's share of good people too just like the AGA.

The bottom line is that we very much alike with the
exception that the typical median income of an AGA
attendee is higher than that of a typical ACA
attendee. Therefore there is more of a threshold to
pay a higher amount per member for conventions,etc.,
and less of a need for members to have their hobby pay
for itself.



Regards,
Larry


--- Cheryl Rogers <cheryl@rightstuffwebsites.com>
wrote:

Erik Olson wrote:

You can't enforce what people sell out of their
rooms.

Absolutely. And I don't think we should police that
(at this time).

I was wrong about my earlier question/comment. In
the convention doc, it
says that *buyers* must be registered for the
convention (Scott--because of
the non-profit thing?).

But here's a quote from 2.7.4.  "Each seller must be
a member of the Local
or the AGA unless the seller donates the proceeds in
full to the Convention."

But this rule applies only to the auction--in the
convention doc, we do not
address the question of whether people may sell out
of their rooms. And I
don't think we should, at this time.

  The
problem is, I think, more of an ethical one for
the ACA.  People at the
AGA conventions (and maybe plant hobbyists as a
whole) still seem
overall interested in "supporting the AGA".

Yes. I agree. Are cichlids bigger money than plants?
I suspect so. I don't
really know. So I should siddown and shaddup now.
:-)

Perhaps we in the AGA enjoy more of a sense of
community than we thought.
Good. Then I am in the right place.

Cheryl
_______________________________________________
AGA-mcm mailing list
AGA-mcm@thekrib.com
http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-mcm


_______________________________________________
AGA-mcm mailing list
AGA-mcm@thekrib.com
http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-mcm


--
Erik Olson
erik at thekrib dot com
_______________________________________________
AGA-mcm mailing list
AGA-mcm@thekrib.com
http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-mcm