I agree that this makes sense, but I think it needs to be stated
briefly and clearly somewhere.
The distinction between "regional chapters" and "other ADHO member
organizations" is clear to us because we've been discussing it, but
to someone coming to this afresh, it isn't obvious from the outset,
and doesn't become clear unless one reads the documentation fairly
carefully. Also, the language that distinguishes between these two
things slips a little during the course of the executive summary:
--"regional chapters" vs. "international affiliates"
--"to make it easy and relatively inexpensive for someone who is a
member of one regional organization (or affiliate) to become a member
of another regional organization (or affiliate)" [implying that
membership in regional organizations and in affiliates is structured
in similar ways with respect to ADHO]
--"At the same time, in order for ADHO to work as an umbrella
organization, participation in ADHO must be an automatic consequence
of membership in any of its constituent organizations, and if there
is a fee for participation in ADHO, it must be included as part of
the membership fee of the constituent organization."
Perhaps it would be enough to add an item to the "summary of
recommendations" clarifying this point.
best, Julia
At 9:34 AM +0100 5/15/03, Harold Short wrote:
>Julia's question makes me wonder whether we need to clarify a couple
>of things before we go public. My reading/understanding was that
>our proposal is based on the idea that it is only organisations that
>will be members of ADHO itself, and that individuals will be
>'members' of ADHO by virtue of membership in one or more of its
>constituent organisations. Individuals will become members of a
>regional chapter by subscribing to LLC, and may become members of
>other ADHO member organisations by following whatever subscription
>or admission procedures they have - e.g. TEI subscriptions.
>
>The issue of membership benefits across/between the various AHDO
>organisations is certainly something that will need to be followed
>up. There are some suggestions in our documents - e.g. reduced
>fees: for subscriptions, for conferences, and for other member
>organisation activities - but I'm sure there is scope for
>imaginative thinking beyond the things we've touched on. And some
>aspects are bound to be rather thorny - in particular I think of
>institutional subscribers to LLC who would also like to be
>institutional members of TEI;. We'd need to have thought clearly
>about how this would work - one issue in this case being the
>significant difference between an LLC sub and a TEI sub... Even
>there, I'm pretty sure John gives a 'for instance' suggestion in his
>paper.
>
>If there is ambiguity either in our thinking or in our wording it
>would be a good idea to resolve it before we go public, because this
>is a fairly fundamental issue.
>
>I'll wait to see what other comments come in, but later today I'll
>see what I can do to clarify/resolve any issues raised by adhoc
>members, particulary in the executive summary.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Harold
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu May 15 2003 - 14:10:00 EDT