Re: Meeting to talk with Dave at Chattanooga

[Neil Frank <nfrank@mindspring.com>]

I think it will be shame if we disband this idea. While the potential
relationship is like a marriage, we will not be joined at the hip. Going in
to the meeting, we should understand what are the "stoppers" for individual
SC members. If one of them comes up at the meeting with Dave, then we can
politely say that we are not ready to make decisions at that time and will
have to get back to him. We should also think about the alternatives - TAG
does not appear to be in good shape (has a (3rd) Fall issue been prepared?)
and we will have to have a separate discussion about how to reinvigorate it. 

Neil

 At 01:08 PM 11/2/2001 -0800, Erik Olson wrote:
>David,
>
>This is not the first time you've brought this up, and it will not be the
>first time I've disagreed.  And it may unfortunately be this point that
>causes us to reject the proposal because we are not all in agreement on
>what we are trying to accomplish.  You have stated before that you want
>the AGA to have some degree of editorial or official control over PAM, and
>that is specifically where I have issues. I do not want the AGA to get
>into a marriage with PAM.  I do think that providing PAM for our members
>is a potential better deal than continuing to publish TAG.  I think that
>the additional subscribers will be good for PAM, and the higher-quality
>publication will be good for the AGA.  But I think any further links will
>counter-productive to both groups.  Dave clearly wants to continue to SELL
>PAM, not turn it into a non-profit...this is his his worry about the deal.
>The AGA wants to continue to be a non-profit club, not part of Dave's
>business.
>
>So as I say, perhaps it is this point that will kill the deal.  You must
>make sure to bring it up as part of our discussion on Saturday, because
>Dave needs to hear it.
>
>  - Erik
>
>On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, David VillaSunscape wrote:
>
>> We may not want to get into this before Saturday morning, but this is the
>> first time I have had a chance to look at the current proposal. It seems to
>> me that we are tap dancing around the main issue (no pun intended) with
this
>> "AGA -- Featuring PAM" and "PAM -- now including free AGA membership" .We
>> will not be able to decide whether someone is signing up for AGA and
>> therefore gets PAM, or the reverse. We really have to acknowledge the fact
>> that we are getting into a marriage with Dave here. and if we try to create
>> a distinction without a difference we are just setting ourselves up to
>> ensure conflict.
>> That's my two bits worth.
>> David
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Erik Olson" <erik@thekrib.com>
>> To: <aga-sc@thekrib.com>
>> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:32 AM
>> Subject: Re: Meeting to talk with Dave at Chattanooga
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>   ------------------
>>   To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@thekrib.com
>>   with "unsubscribe aga-sc" in the body of the message.
>>   Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-sc
>>   When asked, log in as username is "aga-sc", and password "showy".
>> 
>
>-- 
>Erik Olson
>erik at thekrib dot com
>
>  ------------------
>  To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@thekrib.com
>  with "unsubscribe aga-sc" in the body of the message.
>  Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-sc
>  When asked, log in as username is "aga-sc", and password "showy".
>
>
  ------------------
  To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@thekrib.com
  with "unsubscribe aga-sc" in the body of the message.
  Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-sc
  When asked, log in as username is "aga-sc", and password "showy".