Article View: aus.auug
Article #21Are we all April Fools?
From: Bernd Felsche
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 13:34
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 13:34
103 lines
4967 bytes
4967 bytes
AUUGN (Vol 13 Number 1) arrived in my letterbox this past week and I've just had the chance to browse through the pages. Nice to see that there are some fresh articles appearing. I did stumble at the President's report though and some of the assertions made within. What is this? Cloud cuckoo land? The first third of the report expounded the virtues of the President, defending an "attack" by a former member of AUUG. The President's wording on the membership status was "from someone who is not a current member". (I believe that the very same former member extracted the proverbial digit and contributed a 9-page report to AUUGN on the Perth Summer conference.) Although we all appreciate the past efforts of the President, I'm sure that I'm not alone in believing that some of these efforts have to say the least been misguided. The President is apparently not au fait with how marketing works, otherwise the correlation between vendor influence (however subtle that may be) and the image of the "unbiased" associations which are supported by the vendors would have been apparent. When a notionally independent, respected user group gains a high profile, the vendors associated with it are illuminated by the light, and they can claim association/support of the particular group. This is not a bad thing for the user group, or for the vendor, but the user group must be aware that it adds to the vendor's marketing leverage, and must take care not to increase this leverage beyond its real significance. I'm not saying that any of the vendors who support AUUG are "exploiting" it. Let's take a trip back in time and look at AUUG say 5 years back: AUUG was an independent (ok Softway(?) and Labtam were around, but didn't push AUUG to the forefront) user group which drew respect from around the globe. The "problem", as the vendors probably saw it, was that AUUG was "only" respected by the technocracy, and was largely unheard of by the people spending money. Needless to say, those were the times when suits had to be in bad taste to be "in". Enough nostalgia. If I recall the infamous posting from which the President quotes selectively, it drew attention to the change in focus of the group. The trend is now for non-technical people to join (have we run out of geeks already?) the group for technical advice which is probably beyond their grasp. AUUG provides a channel by which the vendors can efficiently feed "information" to prospective clients. Hence AUUG becomes an extension of the marketing arm of the vendor. What will it take to burst the bubble? I'm sure that we'd all like for AUUG to maintain its credibility, but as I see it, we're trading credibility for size. Bigger is not necessarily better. I think it's preferable for AUUG to go back to discussing things nobody else understands and shrink in size, than to grow into a marketing front for vendors which provides very little useful information to the users. Further in the report, the President stated that she believes that the committee was given a _mandate_ at the last AGM to continue in their stated direction. This is a false assumption. I wasn't at the AGM, but I'm sure that (unless the returning officer has been derelict in his duties) no vote was taken and therefore you do NOT have a _mandate_. I was unable to attend due to financial constraints, and had to finish off a software release. Rest assured that if I had attended, you would have noted dissent. Perhaps this year AUUG can sponsor my attendance at the conference (it'll only be about $1000 plus hotel bills). The President the closes, stating that "We don't want to disenfranchise ANY AUUG member" (her emphasis). Excuse me, but your previous paragraph stated that you have already done _exactly_ that, in your mind at least. BTW: I note with some amusement that the President's name does not app, in on the report. What's the matter Pat? Want to remain anonymous? BBTW: I am also mailing Rolf about his misconceptions re the name of the Association (AUUG Inc). Hint: it's not the Australian Open Systems User Group. -- +-----+ Bernd Felsche _--_|\ #include <std/disclaimer.h> | | | | MetaPro Systems Pty Ltd / \ bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au | | | | 328 Albany Highway, X_.--._/ Fax: +61 9 472 3337 |m|p|s| Victoria Park, Western Australia 6100 v Phone: +61 9 362 9355
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Apr12.133451.12877@metapro.DIALix.oz.au>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!uniwa!DIALix!metapro!bernieShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: aus.auug Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!uniwa!DIALix!metapro!bernie From: bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche) Subject: Are we all April Fools? Message-ID: <1992Apr12.133451.12877@metapro.DIALix.oz.au> Summary: Who's group is this anyway Keywords: auug, name, president's report X-Distribution: yes, I know. It's deliberate. Organization: MetaPro Systems, Perth, Western Australia Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 13:34:51 GMT Lines: 103