Life In 19x19

I wanted to wait until Bob Terry finished his series before commenting, and it looks like his rant has come to an end. His posts were pretty lightweight. They looked to be borne of frustration rather than being well thought out, but I thought they raised two good points. The first meshes pretty well with my AGA experiences:

A few years ago I brought a film crew from a prominent Japanese television program to cover the Cotsen Go Tournament. That included the host of the program, a well-known journalist in Japan. I attempted to introduce him to the AGA representative on the scene. What did the AGA representative do? He snubbed the journalist, refusing even to acknowledge his presence. I had to profusely apologize to the journalist for the stupidity and ignorance of the AGA representative.

The next day I brought the AGA representative the footage that we had taken and that was to be broadcast on television later in the day. What did the AGA representative do with it? Nothing. As far as I know it was discarded. Typical of AGA action in response to outside initiatives.

The second was a combination observation/question. The AGA has received $2 million in funding from the Ing Foundation. What does it have to show for it? It's a legitimate question, and I think one that hasn't received the discussion it's due.

pwaldron wrote:I wanted to wait until Bob Terry finished his series before commenting, and it looks like his rant has come to an end. His posts were pretty lightweight. They looked to be borne of frustration rather than being well thought out, but I thought they raised two good points. The first meshes pretty well with my AGA experiences:

A few years ago I brought a film crew from a prominent Japanese television program to cover the Cotsen Go Tournament. That included the host of the program, a well-known journalist in Japan. I attempted to introduce him to the AGA representative on the scene. What did the AGA representative do? He snubbed the journalist, refusing even to acknowledge his presence. I had to profusely apologize to the journalist for the stupidity and ignorance of the AGA representative.

The next day I brought the AGA representative the footage that we had taken and that was to be broadcast on television later in the day. What did the AGA representative do with it? Nothing. As far as I know it was discarded. Typical of AGA action in response to outside initiatives.

...

This first issue is still short on details. Who was the journalist, and who was the alleged AGA rep?

Joaz Banbeck wrote:This first issue is still short on details. Who was the journalist, and who was the alleged AGA rep?

http://gowizardry.com/?p=3037

I organized a similar project in 2005 at the Cotsen Open. A producer, director and cameraman from JATV (Japan-America Television) filmed the go tournament and incorporated it into a twenty minute television program which was broadcast in Los Angeles to a potential audience of 5.6 million viewers, although the typical audience of JATV was 50,000. I gave a couple of copies of the program on two video cassettes to a representative of the AGA, but never received the courtesy of an acknowledgment. I have heard that the AGA is now looking for a promotional video. Perhaps the American Collegiate Go Association is willing to provide their work for that purpose. If so, the AGA is advised to be more diplomatic in dealing with the group.

Maybe someone can figure out more given the above quotation.

pwaldron wrote:I wanted to wait until Bob Terry finished his series before commenting, and it looks like his rant has come to an end. His posts were pretty lightweight. They looked to be borne of frustration rather than being well thought out, but I thought they raised two good points. The first meshes pretty well with my AGA experiences:

A few years ago I brought a film crew from a prominent Japanese television program to cover the Cotsen Go Tournament. That included the host of the program, a well-known journalist in Japan. I attempted to introduce him to the AGA representative on the scene. What did the AGA representative do? He snubbed the journalist, refusing even to acknowledge his presence. I had to profusely apologize to the journalist for the stupidity and ignorance of the AGA representative.

The next day I brought the AGA representative the footage that we had taken and that was to be broadcast on television later in the day. What did the AGA representative do with it? Nothing. As far as I know it was discarded. Typical of AGA action in response to outside initiatives.

The second was a combination observation/question. The AGA has received $2 million in funding from the Ing Foundation. What does it have to show for it? It's a legitimate question, and I think one that hasn't received the discussion it's due.

That story is amazing... maybe the AGA representative wasn't properly informed of the visitor's status? Just giving the benefit of the doubt here...

pwaldron wrote:The second was a combination observation/question. The AGA has received $2 million in funding from the Ing Foundation. What does it have to show for it? It's a legitimate question, and I think one that hasn't received the discussion it's due.

For me thus raises 2 questions:
What did the AGA actually do with the money?
If it was you, how would you spend $2 million over N years to promote Go

Javaness2 wrote:If it was you, how would you spend $2 million over N years to promote Go

I know this question wasn't for me. But I'd put it all into the schools. Ideally, into a combination of studies showing the efficacy of teaching go in improving various other skills, into organizing tournaments at the youth level, and into afterschool programs.

Mivo wrote:My thoughts after reading the blog entry ...

Telling people who put effort, time and often money into a (voluntary or not) project that they fail at both their work and also at life is a rather suboptimal way of trying to make them change or improve. It's much more likely that they'll give you the finger.

Actually, it is likely that they will stop publishing the minutes.

Another new post by Robert Terry
http://gowizardry.com/?p=3304

He seems to have a problem separating one guy annoying him from a whole organization...

oren wrote:He seems to have a problem separating one guy annoying him from a whole organization...

A common theme in these posts is that no one is paying attention to Robert J. Terry. It must be frustrating to have all the answers and not get any attention.

Garuseimasahi wrote:*sigh... At some point, somebody has to stop talking about promoting go... and actually promote go. There comes a point where you have to stop waiting for somebody else to do it.

There are a great number people promoting Go in schools and clubs. I would say anyone who goes out in public to play in a coffee shop, tavern, bookstore, or public park is promoting Go. My club regularly goes to different city festivals and sets-up a table to teach people to play Go. What does your club do?

It's true that there is not a program to promote Go at a national level. Instead, the AGA and the AGF have programs that give members the tools to promote Go in their community. To complain that these programs have failed because a volunteer didn't recognize an opportunity for Japanese TV coverage or left someone at the airport is ridiculous.

As for what the Ing Grants were used for, Let Me Google That For You.

Still doesn't answer the question of how well the $2 million from ING was spent. As we all know, go is about efficiency.

The question really is, what would you have done with the 2 million...

I found this link to provide a good overview of how the money was spent www.usgo.org/board/ApprovedMinutes/minutes-05-11.pdf . A key point was made in this document about informing the Ing Foundation of what you have done. The best way to lose a sponsor, is to treat them like dirt.

A lot was spent on Children. This didn't really extend to National teaching Goe in schools programs - although it certainly did cover, and facilitate, teaching Goe in schools. (Actually, thinking about it, I think some European Countries may have had national schools programs.) It also didn't really get spent on Media campaigns, to advertise the game. However - I doubt anyone proposed those. It is necessary to remember, that some advertising campaigns have been total failures.

1 - Central London Go Club once took out a 1 page advert in a BIG magazine. They received absolutely zero response.
2 - The BGA had a leaflet in every library campaign once, I've never heard anyone voice feedback on what a good idea it was.

If Ing money was spent on similar schemes, and they failed totally, would we have been sympathetic?


An Ing Goe grant allowed me to start teaching the game in Northern Ireland, I'm very glad to have received it, and I would argue they got good value for money from it.

Javaness2 wrote:The question really is, what would you have done with the 2 million...

Left the country.

What does go "prospering in the US" even mean?

I like go, but most of my fix is satisfied by playing online.

I guess the only thing I'd like more of in the US is To have a real life opponent around my level to play wherever I happen to be living. If that's my definition of prospering, I think it's sufficient to try to get people in my local area into the game so that I can play them. I don't even need an organization for that.

I'd guess the definition of "prosper" varies from person to person when it comes to go. For me, it's pretty basic - have an opponent to play against around my level.

But in any case, surely the way to get go to "prosper" in the US is to first identify what it means to "prosper"...

In my case, if anyone cares, I don't see go as failing to prosper in the US. Rather, I see it more locally: go has failed to prosper at my work, for example. I've got a board and game clock in my cabinet, but nobody wants to play against me more than once...

Regardless, let's figure out what it means to prosper before saying whether it has failed or not.