I appreciate the difference. It's my personal preference too, other things being equal -- I'm really a bit of luddite at heart, not because I hate computers and software but because they are so often so badly designed. But my overriding concern is that I doubt that more than a few folks would pay for the difference between web articel and paper article, not for mosses anyway. And if it's only a few that will pay then who else pays the rest of difference? Maybe that kind of preference is really something in the don't-do-it column.So, it might not be an best use of resources. If the buyers are going to cover the full costs, that's another matter; it's jsut hard for me to imagine that -- admittedly I might be limited by my
powers of my imagination.
I wouldn't mind the AGA undertaking subsidy projects, but I think it's essential that the the AGA be doing better than breakeven each year (it's not) if it's going to undertake deficit projects.
Otoh, maybe we could package it (or offset it) with Tshirts, which usually present a positive net revenue.
Simplest thing seems to me to be to run the thing in TAG or run it as a series. But like I said, I'm limited by my imagination ;)
From: Karen Randall <krandall@rdrcpa.biz>
To: AGA Advisory Committee <aga-mcm@thekrib.com>
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 8:01:43 AM
Subject: Re: [AGA-mcm] Aquarium Moss Publication
As one of the people involved in the proposed algae project, I have to say that I wouldnât be happy with a web-based publicationâ I never have been. I suspect you may find other authors who feel the same way.
Karen