Re: RC: DSS summary and question

["Truman Prevatt, PhD" <truman.prevatt@netsrq.com>]

Actually my response was not directed to the DSS issue directly. That's what I get
for not changing subjects. My response was more directed to Teddy's comments on
sponsorship and how the AERC should make sound business decisions based on the
facts involved.

I would suspect that the AERC is not in the position to determine the "value of a
piece of writing" and how to "trade for advertising."  There may be no way under
the current accounting system to track these cost and income. The cost would be
the article "where actually no money changes hands" and the income is the payment
for the advertising, "where actually no money changes hands."

While it would be nice to "just do" everything that seems to make sense, it is
sometimes not easy to do that. I've gotten a real education in these matters since
I started my own business and have my accountant keeps telling me what I can and
cannot do!  I don't have sufficient details to know if this trade articles for
advertising can even be tracked under the current accounting system. When one
changes the policy for one person it must be implemented across the board. I am
not sure it is not a pandora's box.

While the AERC should be responsive to the members, it also must be responsive
considering all the facts and constraints involved. I may make sense to revisit
this policy, but there are a lot of other issues besides the quality of DSS's
articles that must be weighted in deriving the policy.

Truman

> Meanwhile, Becky Huffman notes that DSS's articles represent the quality we
> SHOULD be willing to pay for.   The wonderful Angie McGhee, certainly
> experienced in these matters, notes how much time and effort goes into
> creating a decent articles, especially on an obligatory basis, and thinks
> "the board is making a mistake".   Roger Rittenhouse notes that the BOD "has
> made an error", and Teddy Lancaster and Truman both quickly agree.  Roberta
> Jo Lieberman, who seems to have some very relevant experience notes that
> trade outs are standard industry practice, and asks the board to reconsider.
>   And so on and so forth.
>
> I totally understand that the BOD can't poll the members on every business
> decision - we'd go nowhere fast.    What a contentious group we are
> sometimes!!    And I totally respect their time, dedication, and efforts
> (remember, I was the one who supported some financial recompense or beni's
> for directors who travel AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE to meetings to discuss how to
> make this a better organization for our benefit).   But in a case like this,
> I sure would like to feel as if the board is listening to the membership.

--
Vertex Engineering, Inc.
Innovative Solutions
Superior Support