🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991May9.165219.1558@tc.fluke.COM> kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) writes:
>Well, I called ACM headquarters at 212-869-7440.  I found them less than
>sympathetic.

 Somehow I don't find that surprising.

>wouldn't have a job.  CACM is not a journal, it is a magazine.  He said

  Maybe that is exactly what some of us are complaining about.  If we wanted
a magazine we could subscribe to BYTE or PC-MAGAZINE, or even IEEE-COMPUTER.
But personally I can do without another trashy magazine so overstuffed with
ads that it is hard to find anything useful.

  This is, after all, the main publication that most members receive from
ACM.  It should be a source of useful information, and a way for us to keep
up with what is happening in our field.  It doesn't have to revert to the
high level research articles of 10 years ago that many people complained
about.  It could at least go back to something more like the CACM of two
years back.

  CACM used to be something I looked forward to.  I would scan the table
of contents to find the interesting articles.  Then look over Forum to see
what is being debated.  Next scan over the upcoming conferences timetable.
Then go back and read the interesting article, if any.  Then look at the
articles which might be good for me to read, even if not particularly
interesting.

  These days I have trouble finding the table of contents, trouble finding
the Forum, trouble finding the calendar.  Most of the articles are of the
same quality which causes me to dispatch IEEE-computer to the back of a
shelf unread, and which caused me to drop my subscription to Byte.

  If those in HQ really want it to be a magazine, and not a journal, can't
they at least model it on a magazine like Scientific American, instead of
on something like PC-Magazine?

>there are factions that are complaining that CACM should go back to the "old
>ways" but that's not going to happen.  He also said they had received 10
>positive comments for each negative one.  (Not the ratio we are experiencing,
>but I guess we are one of those "factions".  I suppose we could change his
>ratio though).

  Perhaps some of us thing ACM HQ is so out of touch that it is pointless to
complain.

>All in all, I think they are totally out of control.

>He was interested in learning of specific instances of font clashes and
>inappropriate typography.  I suggest that anyone else who wants to complain
>should be prepared with specific points to complain about, because they
>aren't interested in hearing that you think its ugly and its mother dresses
>it funny.

 Great.  Right when we are looking for information on our profession we must
drop everything and become experts in graphic design just so HQ will listen
to our complaints.


-- 
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
  Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science               <rickert@cs.niu.edu>
  Northern Illinois Univ.
  DeKalb, IL 60115                                   +1-815-753-6940