🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug25.090559.686@fps.mcw.edu>, brodie@fps.mcw.edu writes:
> Yes, if decus needs to save some money and trees {don't we all?}, then
> they could probably charge a nominal fee for some of the subscriptions
> (but does that mean we now pay for the decus newsletters AND decuscope/etc
> separately?   hummmm.)

I am affaird this discussion does not reflect the thinking of most of senior 
DECUS leadership who favor this idea.  (BTW I am truly neutral on this issue)

There is a concern that there really are two classes of members...

1) Those who view themselves as MEMBERS of the Digital Equipment _Computer_ 
User Society.

2) Those who view themselves as CONSUMERS of products and services DECUS 
happens to be the provider of.

Group 1 and 2 have different Chapter communication needs.  For example the 
Group 1 folks should be given a voice in the management of the chapter.  The 
Group 2 folks needs to researched like any other customer base.

The core of the thinking of many folks on the membership fee issue is to use it 
as a tool to identify which folks are members and which folks are consumers.  
One would have to view themselves as a member to pay the fee.

Problems arise...

	A) How many group 2 folks by mistake might you drive away?

	B) How many group 2 folks will become group 1 not because of interest
	but because of discounts?

	C) How many group 1 folks will be identified as group 2 folks simply
	because their company won't pay membership fees?

Remember the design objective is to split the membership list based on how each 
member sees themselves - a membership fee is just a suggested tool.  Trust 
there are many many good reasons why spliting the list is goodness - if for no 
other reason to get rid of dartboard voting.