I did not renew my AGA membership.

[bearzbear]

Tapir,

You wrote: "But I believe some of the critics (bearzbear) fail to see usually problems are not about leadership, visions or corporate turnarounds, but about the simple things people with vision tend to overlook (data needs maintenance, communications needs effort, volunteers are social beings - often complicated ones, dues need to be collected). I am pretty sure people who do corporate turnarounds would wreck any volunteer organization they get into their hands (see: volunteers are social beings) within a short time and you can't hire new volunteers like you can hire new labour."

How in the world is it possible for you to "believe" this??

I think I wrote in several running posts that I suggest that the AGA pull back from new and more ambitious projects in favor of taking care of basic functions (like those you listed)!!

Wish you'd read carefully before commenting.

Part of having a proper vision is seeing that these basic functions need to be fulfilled effectively.

_-_-bearzbear

[bearzbear]

Kirby,

Sure, I suppose that digging into what makes it worth investing in an organization is a worthy topic. But it read like an argument over whose dog is better...

What I am now wondering is IF the AGA has worked itself into a time and place where it has largely become irrelevant. If not, where is it most relevant and useful to the membership (besides the Congress, which is still well attended).

Should the AGA run a server - if only for "official ratings"?? (another related question?)

_-_-bearzbear

[vash3g]

"Until the founders met each other, they didn't know about other university Go clubs. There were no intercollegiate events, and existing lists of clubs were horribly out of date." (About the ACGA)

I know hilltopgo is working on updating the AGA chapter list and I fully well know that it takes time to repair data that hasn't been properly maintained for probably years, but when a newly found organisation makes this its top priority you know it is important. In fact, there are enough people in this forum from everywhere in the U.S. to get this job done in a few weeks, if they would just collect what they already know individually. It really isn't so hard, there is a thread in this forum about the chapter list, if just everybody writes what is wrong about it, it will be very much improved soon.

This is going to be a function of the new website. We're trying to develop a system that when you update your club information then it is updated by the next day on the website. The current site is a manual function that broke some time ago and the web team knows about it.

Should the AGA run a server - if only for "official ratings"?? (another related question?)

The AGA does run its own ratings server. To create something like its own go server would take too much time and work for volunteers. Luckily KGS, IGS, and Tygem have let us use their servers for online tournaments and broadcasting games.

First, why did the AGA not start a forum early on (or now), and before the age of internet forums a listserve? Why was the only place to discuss Go at one time Rec.games.go?? It seems to me a logical thing for the national Go organization to have done.

The AGA did maintain a chapters listserv for many years until problems arose and those involved did not have time to fix it. I am working on getting it back but is taking time since I need to learn all about the issue (know any postfix?). That was the AGA's "forum" of issues. Once that comes back we will have this forum (Thanks L19 admins!) and the listserv.

Part of that: the website. Websites have been BIG for more than a decade (more than that, but...) so why has the AGA's website been so weak for this long? What does that say? What does it say about the organization and the organization's image? What does it say about the leadership, their perceptions and priorities?

When I started on the web team i was 15k at websites. Id like to think my strength progressed and became strong SDK at the site. We changed the site majorly a few years back to get away from all tables and to CSS based. Now we're building the new site which is a CMS (drupal). This is a serious dan level site. Like everything the AGA does it takes time and there is always a learning curve.

It's nice that Daniel has personally chosen to speak for himself here, and Andy O came in once I think, but this points to the underlying issue - why have the leadership of the AGA never(historically) made themselves particularly approachable or available in to the memebers, or in public forums (reachable by the members) and more to the point willing or able to listen to critical reports and factor them back into bonafide action and response?

http://usgo.org/org/who.html - I am sure you know this page since "no one responded to you" by email when you sent items. Daniel, Andy, and Lisa have made themselves known on the board. Andrew Jackson and Thomas Hsiang have both posted on the forums at times. Paul Barchilon pretty known here as well. If theres another person to help I will volunteer myself to answer or direct questions to the best person available to make sure you get answered. Email me @ steve.colburn@usgo.org.

[bearzbear]

"Until the founders met each other, they didn't know about other university Go clubs. There were no intercollegiate events, and existing lists of clubs were horribly out of date." (About the ACGA)
<snip>
http://usgo.org/org/who.html - I am sure you know this page since "no one responded to you" by email when you sent items. Daniel, Andy, and Lisa have made themselves known on the board. Andrew Jackson and Thomas Hsiang have both posted on the forums at times. Paul Barchilon pretty known here as well. If theres another person to help I will volunteer myself to answer or direct questions to the best person available to make sure you get answered. Email me @ steve.colburn@usgo.org.

Steve, you seem genuine in what you say. That's good.

But the reality is that whatever you are doing for the website is more or less being done slowly and in something of an insular manner. I think ur missing the key idea, that is simply that the website needs to meet certain needs. Defining what those needs are is the first order of business. That is not the same as "deciding" in a group what that group says that they "want" or "think" they will put there. Those two sets of information may or may not overlap or even be identical. So, how has the webpage group made these decisions?

Regarding the "contact list" on the usgo site? I and many others aware of the email addresses listed there. I can say with certainty that as of two years ago - the last time I tried and gave up - most of those email addresses do not reply. Those that did reply seemed to feel put upon or less than interested in holding any sort of dialog (when that was the aim of the email, sometimes it was mundane procedural matters).

It is NOT sufficient, imo, for the leadership of the AGA to be passively communicating with the members, as it has long done.

As far as holding "events" on the three servers mentioned. Fine, all well and good. However, it's somewhat invisible and poorly promoted. I get the eJournal and I am on one of those three servers regularly, and it doesn't even show up in my memory as even a vague recollection. Promotion is not something that is done in a passive or "one time" manner if it is to have the desired result.

Somehow the relationships between these things appears lost. The online tourney, the eJournal, the website, emails, they need to be seen as related and linked.

The website - it is more important to have the proper content, and to give the appropriate information FIRST, before making a glossy, glitzy, or slick look. The content (and I do NOT mean pro game analysis and things like that)should be considered FIRST, and the effort put there before months or years spent on making it look good and have more modern physical features.

Imo, the problem with the website (aside from the difficult to navigate aspect) is the nature of the content, more than the coding/features. So the question to ask is what needs should the website fulfill? Then the question becomes how to find out what those needs might be? Only then the proper decisions and match can be made. I am suggesting that there is a disconnect between what well meaning and hard working people decided and what the membership wants or will respond to. You want a positive response from the people who look at the website - nothing else is important, not the color, not the graphics, not the CSS, nothing but that.

As far as starting up a "listserve"?? Today?
That's useful for a small group of people, like the leadership distributing and discussing matters privately, not for the general public. Does this need to be said? Get a server, put up software like the one that runs this forum. That is, if you want to encourage membership participation. Of course, it may be too late. Otoh, if the PROMOTION was done in credible ways, these things still can be brought up to a good baseline level...

BUT, you had best NOT promote anything until you are 100% certain that you can fulfill the expectations that you are setting up.

There is only one single metric here: the response of the members and readers. Either it is positive and upward trending or it is not. Either it results in more satisfaction or not.

(this opens the question of do you follow the response trend or try to drive it, but that is something to ask later...)

_-_-bearzbear

[direwolf]

I told myself I would not post again here, but have decided I would.

msgreg, nice to see you can make sarcastic comments. but you should know the person you are talking about. If you would want I can provide you a resume of my leadership skills and I will assure you, you will find them more than sufficient.

Let me rephrase things, I have known people who were members of the aga in the 70s, i joined in the late 80s and was a member off an on during the 90s, finally deciding to not renew my membership again.

The same story has been going on the whole time. members not being happy with anything the aga has done. The only thing different was in the 70s there was a movement for an alternate go association.

If the aga had true leadership, why has this not changed? As part of basic leadership there is always a mission statement and then a strategic plan associated with that. I find it shocking that only in the last board minutes (wait the last published ones) that a plan is mentioned. On the AGA website, you would think there would be a mission statement... but no, there is only a what and/or who is the aga.

What is the mission of the aga? I think the aga needs to take a step back... decide what their mission is, keep it simple, design a plan to achieve those goals and then ensure that it is done before they expand into all these areas.

[bearzbear]

Steve, I forgot to mention, with respect to this:

http://usgo.org/org/who.html - I am sure you know this page since "no one responded to you" by email when you sent items. Daniel, Andy, and Lisa have made themselves known on the board. Andrew Jackson and Thomas Hsiang have both posted on the forums at times. Paul Barchilon pretty known here as well.

You have raising an interesting point! Is this thought out?
I think not so very well thought out.

How many AGA members just happen to read this site?

Is this an "official" or "semi-official" place for members to reach the admin?
If so, who said?
How are people to know to come here, except by accident or personal initiative (as I just did - not KNOWING who would be here)
When and where has this been made known - like is it a "sticky" in the eJournal?
Do you want that?
Shouldn't the AGA just have a small server and some modern BBS software?

This is the type of thing I am talking about when I decry the functionality of the AGA as a whole.

Don't misinterpret, this is BY FAR the most positive response and interaction with AGA people regarding these matters that I have EVER seen!

(Go back and review the archives at rec.games.go for your personal edification some time... read some of the threads on the AGA. It's not a bad idea to do that, since those who have lived through it remember, and part of the AGAs task is to overcome that past if it is going to thrive)

_-_-bear

[vash3g]

But the reality is that whatever you are doing for the website is more or less being done slowly and in something of an insular manner. I think ur missing the key idea, that is simply that the website needs to meet certain needs. Defining what those needs are is the first order of business. That is not the same as "deciding" in a group what that group says that they "want" or "think" they will put there. Those two sets of information may or may not overlap or even be identical. So, how has the webpage group made these decisions?

Years of help, many many contributors, little deletion of data, listening to people on what they want, google analytics to see what pages should be promoted.

Regarding the "contact list" on the usgo site? I and many others aware of the email addresses listed there. I can say with certainty that as of two years ago - the last time I tried and gave up - most of those email addresses do not reply.

As you haven't tried in two years, i cannot take you seriously about contacting people. Write me an email on who didnt answer and I will check the status of the email address if it is one listed for @usgo.org. Seriously, two years? I think you should try again with someone who is posting here or one of those addresses.

As far as holding "events" on the three servers mentioned. Fine, all well and good. However, it's somewhat invisible and poorly promoted. I get the eJournal and I am on one of those three servers regularly, and it doesn't even show up in my memory as even a vague recollection. Promotion is not something that is done in a passive or "one time" manner if it is to have the desired result.

KGS has been great for promoting events for the AGA. AFAIK the AGA doesnt have huge contacts on the other two servers for big promotions by them. I agree that sometimes the EJ doesnt send out enough information for tournaments, but hes also a volunteer and gets many more emails than anyone else.

The website - it is more important to have the proper content, and to give the appropriate information FIRST, before making a glossy, glitzy, or slick look. The content (and I do NOT mean pro game analysis and things like that)should be considered FIRST, and the effort put there before months or years spent on making it look good and have more modern physical features.

Dude, we have a ton of content. It may not be the long news articles you want, but theres a lot on teaching, running events/clubs, how to play, the songbook, etc. Me thinks you have not browsed enough.

As far as starting up a "listserve"?? Today?
That's useful for a small group of people, like the leadership distributing and discussing matters privately, not for the general public. Does this need to be said?

The listserv is for the AGA Chapters. Since you are neither a member and im sure not part of a chapter, this does not apply to you. Others want this very much.

Get a server, put up software like the one that runs this forum.

This aint broke, why do we need another one to "fix" it?

[hyperpape]

I think I wrote in several running posts that I suggest that the AGA pull back from new and more ambitious projects in favor of taking care of basic functions (like those you listed)!!

Sure you did. Right after you finished throwing out grand plans about what the AGA should do (viewtopic.php?p=90189#p90189)

It's called trolling, or bait and switch.

[bearzbear]

I think I wrote in several running posts that I suggest that the AGA pull back from new and more ambitious projects in favor of taking care of basic functions (like those you listed)!!

Sure you did. Right after you finished throwing out grand plans about what the AGA should do (http://lifein19x19.com/forum/viewtopic. ... 189#p90189)

It's called trolling, or bait and switch.

Sure, whatever you say.

Grand plans?
Like respond to members?
Provide content that members will respond to?

I said to pull back from grand plans in favor of basics.

Do you just want to fight about everything?
What's your vision on this?
Lay it out, so you can be called a troll.
Ok?

Thanks so very much.

_-_-bearzbear

[direwolf]

I have been mistaken... There might be a reason to join the AGA. As a member of the AGA, I get free membership into the Canadian Go Association. As a CGA member, I can join an online go league and also receive free go lessons from a 3p.

Also, the CGA has gone to a free membership for its members and still is not charging for those services. Talk about a leadership vision to get people involved.

[bearzbear]

But the reality is that whatever you are doing for the website is more or less being done slowly and in something of an insular manner. I think ur missing the key idea, that is simply that the website needs to meet certain needs. Defining what those needs are is the first order of business. That is not the same as "deciding" in a group what that group says that they "want" or "think" they will put there. Those two sets of information may or may not overlap or even be identical. So, how has the webpage group made these decisions?

Years of help, many many contributors, little deletion of data, listening to people on what they want, google analytics to see what pages should be promoted.

Listening to people on what they want? How so?
Google analytics will only tell you something about what you already have.
Nothing about what you might have or should have.
Be careful about which assumptions are made?

Regarding the "contact list" on the usgo site? I and many others aware of the email addresses listed there. I can say with certainty that as of two years ago - the last time I tried and gave up - most of those email addresses do not reply.

As you haven't tried in two years, i cannot take you seriously about contacting people. Write me an email on who didnt answer and I will check the status of the email address if it is one listed for @usgo.org. Seriously, two years? I think you should try again with someone who is posting here or one of those addresses.

Don't take me seriously.
Again with the write about who did what or did not?
Pointless. We went through this bit early on.
Let's deal with framing the larger concepts?

The fact of the matter is that the lines of communication are not solid, not clear, not easy, and variable at best. Unprofessional. Which is ok, ok to be unprofessional, but not if you set urself up as a professional organization representing the USA's Go interests to the public and the world.

Make sense?

As far as holding "events" on the three servers mentioned. Fine, all well and good. However, it's somewhat invisible and poorly promoted. I get the eJournal and I am on one of those three servers regularly, and it doesn't even show up in my memory as even a vague recollection. Promotion is not something that is done in a passive or "one time" manner if it is to have the desired result.

KGS has been great for promoting events for the AGA. AFAIK the AGA doesnt have huge contacts on the other two servers for big promotions by them. I agree that sometimes the EJ doesnt send out enough information for tournaments, but hes also a volunteer and gets many more emails than anyone else.

Steve, you simply are missing the big picture.
There are reasons and excuses for almost every single specific problem mentioned. Responses as to 'how we are going to fix it'. Taken as a whole, the basics are not being covered properly. That is the point.

WHY does Chris get "more emails than anyone else"?
Tell me WHY, please??

The website - it is more important to have the proper content, and to give the appropriate information FIRST, before making a glossy, glitzy, or slick look. The content (and I do NOT mean pro game analysis and things like that)should be considered FIRST, and the effort put there before months or years spent on making it look good and have more modern physical features.

Dude, we have a ton of content. It may not be the long news articles you want, but theres a lot on teaching, running events/clubs, how to play, the songbook, etc. Me thinks you have not browsed enough.

Methinks you are confusing pages with content.
The website is a one-way street.
Everything coming FROM the AGA out.
Nothing coming in.
It's a wall that meat gets thrown over - to be crude about it in order to make the point.
Some say the quality of meat thrown over is not so great.

As far as starting up a "listserve"?? Today?
That's useful for a small group of people, like the leadership distributing and discussing matters privately, not for the general public. Does this need to be said?

The listserv is for the AGA Chapters. Since you are neither a member and im sure not part of a chapter, this does not apply to you. Others want this very much.

As I said.
You did not specify, per that which I read.

I was referring to the membership, not the administration (which includes the chapter heads, unless you want to discriminate between members without a chapter and chapters??)

Get a server, put up software like the one that runs this forum.

This aint broke, why do we need another one to "fix" it?

[/quote]

It is broken.

A server may or may not be useful, but IF ratings are important to people, and they can not get to tournaments or local chapters (of which there are few), the providing a means to that end would seem to dovetail with a very important function of the AGA - provide ratings to players.

A server unique to the AGA is only one possible way to solve this problem.

The PROBLEM is that the AGA to date has not put these many factors together into a unified strategic approach which can be executed within the practical constraints that exist RIGHT NOW. So, as I have repeated a few times now, the AGA would be well advised to reconsider the scope of their efforts and focus on those that can be addressed effectively and relatively quickly first, and pull back (with apologies and explanations, of course) WRT the others.

_-_-bearzbear


PS. here's a non Go analogy: I'll take a rusty old car that RUNS everyday and gets me where I need to go over one that is fancy, lots of features and a big engine that doesn't run very well at all and is UNRELIABLE. Of course everyone wants both. But right now BOTH does not exist as a real option.

[hyperpape]

Several people have had the idea of an online server for ratings. You might wish to find some of those discussions.

[bearzbear]

No thanks.

What is important is trying to convey what the big picture actually is, and how to frame it, analyze it, and think about it.

All solutions will arise from that.

_-_-bearzbear

[vash3g]

This is my last comment on this thread.

The AGA is a like the ocean. There are periods of high tide and low tide. We are always moving, gaining momentum and falling back. For what we've done up till today will bear on us tomorrow and the future.

Throughout this conversation you have wanted us to only look at the forest and not the trees. Unfortunately the forest is made up of many trees and many species. To only discuss half of the issue (the forest), we lose understanding. By looking, and understanding, that both exist we can then have a better conversation about issues everyone is having.

I wish some people were more open with their issues and problems so we could fix them as they are close in our minds.

Please contact me direct with any issues relating to this thread. I would love to hear some comments on the looks of the new website as you check it out.

[msgreg]

msgreg, nice to see you can make sarcastic comments.

My sarcastic remark here to run for president was followed by my sincere suggestion to "follow Daniel's path and run for the board".

I apologized here.

I meant no offense, and again I apologize.

There are a handful of useful suggestions in this thread, but very little in practical next steps. I've latched on to a few suggestions that I'm personally interested in and participated in other threads to actually do something organizationally and collectively to come up with practical solutions. Here and here

Until we can get to the point of suggesting practical solutions within reach of the current resources, ideas are just ideas.

I suggest taking any of the ideas in this thread, and starting another thread that begins to answer the questions of "how" and "what are the next steps".

What is the mission of the aga? I think the aga needs to take a step back... decide what their mission is, keep it simple, design a plan to achieve those goals and then ensure that it is done before they expand into all these areas.

These are great suggestions! Why don't you ask Daniel to find out the current mission statement and start a thread to formalize a proposal to create it or change it. Then we can all vote at the next congress (or maybe two congresses from now, depending on if the bylaws prescribe a procedure).

The AGA is its members. Help take that step by reading up on the minutes, finding out what the current mission is, if any, perhaps ask Daniel, and help formulate one.

Respectfully,