Petition Signature Request

As many already know, I've thrown my hat in and been nominated for First Vice Chair of American Mensa. Like some candidates, however, I am also going through the petition process, which, although a bit redundant, does seem to be a way to provide a subtle message to voters --and to me--that there really are members who feel that I would serve Mensa well.

So please, if you would like to help Mensa evolve into an modern, 21st century organization, sign my petition on AML the election page.

Moderating Comments and Posts

Leah recently shared a link with me regarding managing comments on blogs. What lept out at me was this section of the post, which, although written specifically about blog comments, so clearly explains why the AML Forums are moderated:

     ... In regards to tone/style, a comment that is hateful, condescending, or insulting in tone is rather problematic. In regards to content, hateful, obscene, racist, sexist or other such material would also potentially be problematic…
     First, they can easily drive away other readers who are not interested in reading such things. To use an analogy, allowing such comments to remain is like allowing rowdy, violent and hateful customers to remain in a typical store. Even if they are customers, they will tend to drive away well behaved customers who just want to shop. Likewise, allowing such comments can drive away those who are interested in the blog’s topics but not in being insulted or treated with contempt. The basic idea is that any value added by such comments will be outweighed by the value lost when others are driven away.
     Second, such comments can be damaging to a blog’s reputation and the experience it offers. To use an analogy, a business that wishes to appear professional works hard to maintain that appearance (and reality). Allowing such comments on a site is a bit like allowing people to urinate on the business floor, harass other customers, and so forth. As such, it seems sensible to delete such comments. This is because any value gained from such comments will be outweighed by the damage done to the blog.

Dues & Social Latching

On a forum thread about raising dues, Judy wrote: "but once you've 'latched on' socially, the price becomes a non-issue. " 

I replied:
I think you just nailed it on the head. Having seen the raw data from many surveys of members about what they want from Mensa or why they do not renew, I believe that for most, it's not the price, it's the strength of the social connection that determines whether or not someone renews his or her membership. If they join and meet no one of interest, or only see unwelcoming and abrasive mudslinging, then even dues of $10 are too high.

InterLink Guidelines & Policies

The Communications Committee just approved the following guidelines & policies for InterLink. As you can see, we started with the purposes and general philosophy from the old interLoc guidelines.

InterLink Guidelines and Policies

September 2010

Description and Purposes

InterLink, an official publication of American Mensa, Limited, is a monthly e-newsletter resource intended to serve as a channel of communication among the National Office, the AMC, the local officers, and other interested members. It is a vehicle for significant, thought-provoking ideas, suggestions, questions, concerns, or discussions from Mensa members relative to Mensa administration or operation. Its purpose is to assist Mensans interested in performing leadership duties within Mensa, now or in the future.

Embedded links help readers connect with other members’ discussions as they read. Content for InterLink is gathered and generated by a team of volunteers; input and responses from readers are included in every issue.

Content

Each issue should include at least one feature article, as well as readers’ responses and any of several standing columns. Feature articles should be pertinent to the functioning of Mensa and be of value to a reasonable number of officers. Content intended for only a few, complaints about individual instances, or suggestions for localized improvements, unless they have larger implications, should normally be forwarded to the person or persons involved for action, rather than published. Communications, even if referring to single instances, that have a constructive information value to Local Groups are potential publication material.

InterLink is a forum for intelligent and reasoned presentation of views, even if they are unpopular or controversial. However, space in InterLink will not be made available to the individual fanatic, nor for soothing personal ego bruises, nor for unsubstantiated charges or vendettas.

Because each issue may include as many as seven or eight individual pieces, no one piece should be longer than 400-500 words. Less is more; writers and columnists will be encouraged to be informal but pithy as opposed to conversational.

Pieces will not be edited extensively but rather looked over for grammar, punctuation, AML house style, etc.

The Production Manager will do a preliminary evaluation of any incoming piece to determine its adherence to the above goal statement. Any lingering questions about the appropriateness of any piece (from the PM or others) will be forwarded to and answered by the Communications Officer, who may choose to consult with the AMC Chair or others as necessary.

Deadlines

• Working backwards, InterLink will be sent out on the 20^th of each month.
• The final copy of the text will be sent out for review on the 15^th of each month. Reviewers may include the Chairman, Communications Officer, Executive Director and other national directors as appropriate.
• Materials for each issue must be turned in to the Production Manager by the 10^th of each month.

Columnists

The Communications Officer will appoint volunteer columnists and apprise the Production Manager of changes to the team.

Columnists will be reminded once about upcoming deadlines and prompted to respond with their plans, whether they are submitting material for the upcoming issue or not. Columnists are assumed to be responsible people and will not be hounded.

Not every column will be published every month.

Columnists who accept or make use of member responses are not required to use every response. The goal should be a representative sample of all responses to each question. Often the same readers will answer more than one question. Columnists should pick whichever response is likely to be the most beneficial for other members, or whichever rounds out a question the best, but should pick just one from each person. Along the same lines, all other qualifications being equal, priority should probably be given to responses from readers who have not responded before.

Rather than open the Pandora’s box of editing long responses, columnists may pass over long entries in favor of terse and substantive ones. When merited, longer articles may be serialized over multiple issues. As much of each piece as possible will be linked to its online presence, so readers can go get more information for themselves if so inclined.

[Columnists as of  August 2010: Brian Reeves- Features; James Franzen-Mensa Matters in the Online Community ; Liz Meadows-Timely Questions. Claire Natola-Newsletter Highlights; Carol Philo-Elist Round-up; Staff-Resource Review and Profiles in Leadership]

Letters

Letters to InterLink will be assumed to be for publication unless otherwise specified by the writers. A statement to this effect will be included with each issue next to the response link.

If letters are responding to a specific topic, the sequence will be as follows:

• One round of responses to any original article or piece.
• One round of rebuttal.

Anything beyond this sequence runs a high risk of adding nothing new to the conversation and instead alienating/boring other readers. Those who desire to continue the topic can, either publicly or behind the scenes, be encouraged to take the conversation to any one of AML’s online meeting places for further discussion.

Is the AMC "Out of Touch?"

Pam recently returned from her annual ASAE convention, and shared some observations and lessons and pointers to blogs reviewing the convention. I read this one at Social Fish :

Most of it was pretty specific to ASAE, however, this jumped out at me:

"Here’s a lesson: there is no such thing anymore as “unofficial” versus “official”member activity. We’re all part of the same community. We’re all building community and engagement on behalf of ASAE – for you, not for us. The point of YAP is to get young association professionals (including “young to the profession” and “young at heart”) more involved in ASAE. Get it?  We’re doing it for the love.  All we’d like in return is a little love back once in a while.  We’re feeling our love is unrequited, and if you’re not careful, one day we’ll take mom’s advice and go find other fish in the sea."

We in Mensa do try so hard to distinguish between official and unofficial, between ASIE-regulated and Fist-waving independence. Mensa has very much become a huge set of overlapping groupings of members, some of which are initiated top-down, and some of which are grown grass-up. But all are equally essential to gestalt of the Mensa experience.

Reading the comments, the recurring theme was that ASAE leaders were out of touch with their membership. I see this same complaint about AMC on some of the Yahoo lists. I really don't feel like I'm out of touch. So either I'm not and other AMCers are, or I am and I am not seeing that in myself because I don't understand what members mean by "out of touch."

So, readers.... are Mensa's national leaders "out of touch" with the membership, and if so, what do you mean by that? What actions or inactions make you reach that conclusion? 

Hhmmm.... and since there are so many members and so many member communities, are there  particular segments of the membership that leaders should be touching more than others? (Get your minds out of the gutter!)