I did not renew my AGA membership.

After trying a year of membership, it seemed pointless.
No reason to.

Sure I want Go to prosper in the USA.

But, for example, attempts to communicate with the "AGA" were essentially fruitless. Even things of a pretty mundane and simple nature did not receive reasonable attention. Unimportant in the larger scope of the world, but seemingly emblematic of how this organization is "organized". Or not organized, as you may wish to think.

Unresponsive and impenetrable.

Volunteer? Sure, I understand. Perhaps it is a thankless and time consuming thing to do. Nobody wants the job(s)? Is this what the story is? Hard to get anyone to do anything? So, you get what you get?

Out of all the members, are there no PROFESSIONALS who are expert at the specific and many tasks and efforts that the AGA must address? It is impossible to recruit and marshall such people to the cause? Or perhaps no one wants to or has thought to do this. Hmmm...

Yeah, the eJournal is ok. But is it a replacement for the monthly hard copy? Does it provide the same sort of articles? Was the monthly magazine doing what it should have?

Guess the Congress is a good thing. True. But what else?

I suppose if I wanted to play in tournaments I'd have to have a membership.

Shame it is. In my view, a shame.

Just saying. My views. Meaningless, really. Feel free to disregard entirely.

_-_-bearzbear

You and something like 75-90% of people who've ever had a membership.



You don't play in tournaments, you say, so: what could the AGA do that would make it seem "worth it" for you to stay a member?

(You bothered to make this post, so I'm assuming that you're at least a little bit interested in seeing us fix things. )



Can you give a little more detail as to what you were trying to accomplish, and who you spoke to about it? (I'm an AGA board member. Feel free to PM me if you don't want to state more publicly.)

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

Every time I hear this I cringe a little. The AGA has about 50 volunteers at any given time.I wish people would say "I tried to contact people at this/these email addresses."

_________________
Decisions are made by those who show up.
and possibly those willing to attend secret meetings in ancient basements

I understand this perspective, but I don't think bearzbear is making an unjustified criticism. All organizations are made of individuals, yet they get judged collectively. Further, people are used to doing that, and there's nothing we can do to stop it short of modifying American culture. Personally, therefore, I'd like to come up with a system that reduces this complaint, no matter how busy/distracted/etc the participating individuals get.

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

What about setting some kind of collaborative bug tracking? I.e. in my work we use Zendesk (among many other tools in other sites we manage, but we started recently with this one for one of our sites). When someone sends an "email", someone marks it as "their task". Or assigns the task to someone. This solves the main issue of multiple managed accounts, where other managers may miss a previous answer, or don't know if someone is doing the work.

_________________
Geek of all trades, master of none: the motto for my blog mostlymaths.net

Ok.

Vash_3g and daniel_the_smith, I take it you are both involved in some way with the AGA? Daniel, I think you said you were a board member.

To start with, if you are unaware then that is part of the problem. Not about what I say, but the situation in general.

IF you are unaware and want to be, then you have to ask urself the question, why? And then "what can I do to create a situation where these things become "visible" to me".

Should I need to say this?

Doubtless, it makes no difference which specific or particular person or persons I interacted with since the issue(s) are endemic to the organization as a whole. You may in fact be communicating regularly with each other, that is a closed loop cycle.

My experience(s) merely mirror those of countless other persons that I have spoken to over the YEARs. I joined with no preconceptions. That I had the same sort of experience merely serves to codify their anecdotal experiences.

I chose to post. Others may or may not have. Most people just walk away and say nothing, or just maintain their membership (a form of charity, in the main). I think that there are a great many frustrated with the AGA individuals out there.

I not trying to say that no one is making an effort, or that no one is trying. What I am saying is that as a whole the organization seems to lack a sort of self awareness and understanding of how what they do comes across out in the rest of the world.

_-_-bearzbear

For me personally (member since 2009), I'd say I subscribe about 80% for the tournaments, 20% for charity.



This doesn't necessarily contradict, but I'm not frustrated with the AGA. Perhaps it's because I'm expecting less from it than you are? For me it is primarily a tournament organizing body.

Specificity really does matter. I've had pretty good experiences with contacting the AGA in the past, and a few bad ones. But there are many people doing their jobs well. It's insane to think you can do anything by just saying "The AGA is crap!" There has to be some way to identify the places where communication is breaking down, and fix those.

Perhaps there should be some kind of way to report a failure to get feedback? It might be a pain in the butt if people had unrealistic expectations, but it does seem like the organization needs some way to assess where communication is working and where it isn't.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

This reminds me a bit of a scene outside a club I walked by last weekend:

"Do you know who I am? Do you even know who I am?"
"No, sir, I don't. Who are you?"
"Do you really not know, or are you just saying you don't know? Are you euphemism around with me?"
"I really don't know. Who are you?"
"Holy euphemism. That's exactly the problem. You are going to be in so much euphemism - not knowing who I am - I can't euphemism believe it - now, this is your last chance to let me in before..."

Hmm. Bearzbear says he had a frustrating experience but he won't give any details about what happened and simply says to people who ask that they should know what's wrong. Sounds like trolling to me.

Unless Bearzbear identified himself as "Bearzbear" in his communications with the AGA, I'd say those of us here who are involved in the AGA can't really be condemned for not recognizing Bearzbear or his/her complaints.

Notwithstanding which, I don't like it that the AGA sometimes seems impenetrable, but that depends highly on what the person contacting the AGA is saying. If someone is trying to get their misspelled name corrected or put a tournament on the calendar, then we need to respond. Likewise when trying to clear the hitch that has delayed the last ratings update. Sometimes contacts are not as clear or easy as that.

So far those of you who claim to represent the AGA - you have kept urselves nameless, I must note - seem to be saying and doing precisely what THE PROBLEM is.

That you're blissfully unaware of it would be funny if it were a stage comedy on Broadway (properly written, of course).

It's NOT who I had interaction with, I have had interaction with enough varied people to be quite confident that there is an endemic problem. It's like ur all color blind, and I am pointing at a sign written in the color you can't see!

You can not "fix" the problem by trying to correct whatever it is or was that I was interacting with the AGA about, certainly not now. That is moot. Finding one or two persons who may or may not have done their "jobs" up to my standards is irrelevant. I am speaking to the approach that the organization has in an institutional, management and policy sense.

I have no doubt that many have had perfectly fine interactions. It's also clear that not everyone can or will be happy with any given interaction or organization.

My expectations as a member of the AGA, I assure all readers are in the main minimal.

The only "big" issue I may have any interest in relates to the broader health and prosperity of Go as something that is part of American culture, and the role that the AGA has in that.

So let me ask the AGA officers who are chiming in, how do you self rate the performance of the AGA wrt these two things: 1) "membership service(s)" and 2)the promotion of Go in the USA?

Here's the ratings, 1 - 10, fill in the in-betweens urself:

10 - Exceeds all expectations
5 - neither good nor bad, about as good as last year.
1 - Dismal

_-_-bearzbear

No points for perception. I guess Daniel threw you off by adding "the" in his name. Also, "aokun"=Andy Okun. They don't exactly go through great lengths to remain "nameless."

Also, this is starting to sound like a campaign speech. No one has denied that there are problems or that you experienced them. They just want to know what they are.

Dear Troll,

The AGA as a whole is doing what every go player in the US regardless of membership is doing, spreading go to the masses. While this is not always top news, its a constant thing. I play in a coffee shop at a local university and travel to many tournaments with giant magnets on my car to promote our club. Overall I would give the AGA a 7.

As for your other points: I am Steve Colburn. Check my other posts about the AGA here. Ive been webmaster/server admin for some time, congress e-journal support, and various AGA help positions. Ive had problems with communication. When I've posted here about it something has happened. Ive also posted very specific questions (still no postfix experts!?) and comments about the AGA too!

Tell us your real problems, then we'll stop thinking youre a dirty troll. We await your less vague questions.

Disgusted,

Steve
aka Vash3G

_________________
Decisions are made by those who show up.
and possibly those willing to attend secret meetings in ancient basements

nice to see BearZ is still alive and trolling

_________________
North Lecale

No I am not *trolling*.

Sorry. Easy way to put what I am saying in the round file.

Ok, so now you have said ur names, but I can not read minds nor can I assume that any given name here is related to one's real name. Nor do I personally keep a log of "who's who" in the AGA. Sorry, I apologize for not knowing who you are.

Steve, your reaction is one of a highly insecure individual. Calling me names? Why? I am not vague at all. I made it clear what "my problems" might be.

Are you all afraid to "self rate" the AGA?
State what you think of the job it is doing?
Why?

Should this not be talked about?
If not this, then what?

I think I made it clear, the AGA has a problem in terms of it's (saying it again but using different words, in the hope it will resonate) approach to matters such as MEMBER RELATIONS & SERVICE and REPRESENTING GO PLAYERS to the population at large. Furthermore, I am saying that it is an institutional problem (of long standing) which is real. Worse still, it is obvious, but apparently you and others are blissfully unaware or choose to prentend so.

Steve, in particular, if you think that the AGA is rating a "7" you are believing your own 'press releases'. It's not.

And again, my minor frustrations with dealing directly with the AGA mirror what others have said to me before during and after the time I interacted. What happened to me is unimportant compared to what it indicates.

Can you not understand that your problems are GENERAL in nature, and not specific to any single incremental point?? Open your eyes and minds, and look around.

Ok, Go analogy, ur playing the wrong joseki the wrong way, over and over and insisting that it is ok because this is how you have always played it. Got it now?

_-_-


PS. deal with the message, not the messenger.

Andy? Ok. I specifically avoided singling out ANY person or part of the organization. Hope you noticed.

I am not condemning any person or persons.

What I am talking about is the ORGANIZATIONAL PERSONNA, MAKE-UP, ETHOS, FUNCTION, FOCUS, EXECUTION...etc...

For example, right now, none of you is open to any input.
You keep wanting the "input" in a pre-specified manner that is not appropriate or useful. Valuable input was given by someone else in this thread, and ignored promptly. (as far as anyone reading can tell)

How about now? Catching on?

_-_-

_-_-

Sorry, im a bit fussy still. Can you break it down into less vague terms for me? You see member relations and representing go players are big topics and im not sure how the AGA has problems with these for you.

_________________
Decisions are made by those who show up.
and possibly those willing to attend secret meetings in ancient basements

This sounds a lot like this.

"You have a problem!"

"What problem?"

"Nothing specific, but you definitely have a problem!"

"Ok, can you help me fix the problem?"

"No! If you don't know what it is, then you're beyond help!"

Seriously. OP, it sounds like you have a legit problem, but without letting people know A) What you expected when you joined (with specifics) and B) What happened to let down your expectations (with specifics), there is little anyone can do. No one can read your mind, you need to be more clear.

If you're not trying to troll us, ask yourself the following question: suppose your reader hasn't had bad experiences communicating with the AGA, would what you're saying provide them any evidence that there's a problem or be convincing?

It obviously wouldn't. Try to fix that, and we can have a productive conversation.

_________________
Occupy Babel!