🚀 go-pugleaf

If it wasn't for the SIG's I wouldn't be an ACM member at all.
However, even with them the quality seems to vary significantly.
I'll put in my plug here for SIGCOMM and SIGOPS.  I'm consistently
reading their quarterly publications more thoroughly than just
about anything else. 

I've never found CACM to be very interesting, though some of its
new departments are starting to catch my interest.   However,
the new style is distracting and not appropriate for the CACM.
The other ACM journals that I've tried seem to be aimed more at the
acedemic set than the practioner set. As a result, the ones I've tried 
have only been single year experiments.

Another problem is price/value.   I'm seriously considering
paying non-member rates to join SIGCOMM and SIGOPS because I don't think
that I'm getting what I'm paying for with a full ACM membership.
I believe that I get a lot more value out of my IEEE/CS membership.
The IEEE seems to support the practioner and the community better by
sponsoring standards projects such as POSIX and 802, and their
comprehensive tutorials and even videos.  Plus their CS journals
and other publications are more readable and for me generally more
informative and applicable to my work.

Additionally, the ACM seems to always be playing catchup to the IEEE.  
They've recently added their ACM Frontier series of books, 
and are now starting to sponsor some of the group orientated benefits such
as insurance and so on that the IEEE has had for years.   And since
I'm already getting them from the IEEE I'm not going to take advantage
of them.

Maybe the ACM can turn it around, but this is likely my last year as an
ACM member.

-Steve