It may be an urban vs rural issue. Chicago has kid stuff at its regular Monthly Meeitngs. Our RG has a kids track. I've dragged my twins, to meetings and dinners and RGs since they were toddlers. They seemed to be genuinely welcomed by the adults, who include them in board games, conversations, and invite them to unofficial parties.
I don't know what people mean when they wish for AML to become more family friendly. Families are allowed at most events. Many groups and RGs and all AGs plan kid activities. Dues are cheaper for family members. Short of legislating that children must always be allowed and welcomed at activities hosted by kid-free-by-choice members, I'm not sure what more a parent could want. If there are only barroom gatherings on your local calendar, then host your own playgroup. And if no one comes, consider that other members with children aren't looking for the same things you are or that they’re simply too booked with soccer and school and scouts and piano lessons and birthday parties and laundry and PTO and day camp and swimming and and...
As for the extra financial burden placed on families as opposed to singles, yes, of course it costs more to bring the entire family to a Mensa event. It also costs more at the grocery store, movie theaters, and dentist offices. I spend a lot of extra money for the joy of reproducing, but I would never expect that my child-free friends should share my financial burden when we all decide to go to Six Flags together.
So yeah, I think Mensa is adequately “family-friendly.”
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Secret Ballots and That WG Funding Vote
Here’s another couple questions posed to candidates this past spring:
Did you vote in favor of casting the secret vote re: funding the extra days for the AMC at the WG? Why? (Note: I am not asking what your vote on the funding itself was.) And for those that were not on the AMC at the time, would you have voted in favor of casting the secret vote as per above had you been on the AMC at the time? Why?
No, I did not vote “yes” on the motion to make that a secret ballot.
The entire AMC votes to approve AG bids. When the AMC awarded the 2010 AG, they voted 14-6 to hold the discussion in closed session. Those voting against the closed session were Lederman, McBean, Kinder, Kuyper, O'Connor, and Crawford. Do you think the AG bid discussion should have been held in closed session? Why or why not?
Well, obviously I didn’t think it should have been discussed in closed session, although I didn’t feel very strongly in that particular case.
Secret ballots are useful if the voting is about a specific personal issue that may result in a slap to someone. For example, if we’re voting to remove Gertrude from office, I don’t want Gertrude to know if I vote to keep her or to can her—if I knew that she was going to know how I voted, I’d be less able to vote based purely on what I think is best for Mensa and more likely to allow my value of her friendship (or our enmity) to influence my choice. In the case of the AG bids, it’s hard to talk candidly and possibly critically about projects that members have put so much of themselves into when those members are in the room and their hearts are on their sleeves where we can see them. It’s kind of like always having the firing squad include one blank bullet. If someone is likely to get hurt by the outcome, then a measure of privacy in the implementation seems reasonable.
But on other things, I don’t have a problem being open. The argument that a secret ballot lets us vote based on how we really feel rather based on political considerations doesn’t make sense to me. In a representative body, we should be voting based on political considerations. If the folks I’m representing want me to vote X, then that’s how I should vote. If I consistently vote in opposition to what the majority of members prefer, I won’t get re-elected/appointed; which is as it should be. As it happened, for that particular issue I polled my constituency—the Editors and Webmasters, as well as members of my Local Group, to find out their thoughts on the extra nights at the WG. Even though the majority thought that the AMC should be in attendance all five days and that our expenses should be covered accordingly, once at the table I attempted a compromise: if you read the minutes of that meeting, I moved to amend the original motion to say that the AMC would get only the gala banquet paid for in addition to the normal 3 nights and meals.
Did you vote in favor of casting the secret vote re: funding the extra days for the AMC at the WG? Why? (Note: I am not asking what your vote on the funding itself was.) And for those that were not on the AMC at the time, would you have voted in favor of casting the secret vote as per above had you been on the AMC at the time? Why?
No, I did not vote “yes” on the motion to make that a secret ballot.
The entire AMC votes to approve AG bids. When the AMC awarded the 2010 AG, they voted 14-6 to hold the discussion in closed session. Those voting against the closed session were Lederman, McBean, Kinder, Kuyper, O'Connor, and Crawford. Do you think the AG bid discussion should have been held in closed session? Why or why not?
Well, obviously I didn’t think it should have been discussed in closed session, although I didn’t feel very strongly in that particular case.
Secret ballots are useful if the voting is about a specific personal issue that may result in a slap to someone. For example, if we’re voting to remove Gertrude from office, I don’t want Gertrude to know if I vote to keep her or to can her—if I knew that she was going to know how I voted, I’d be less able to vote based purely on what I think is best for Mensa and more likely to allow my value of her friendship (or our enmity) to influence my choice. In the case of the AG bids, it’s hard to talk candidly and possibly critically about projects that members have put so much of themselves into when those members are in the room and their hearts are on their sleeves where we can see them. It’s kind of like always having the firing squad include one blank bullet. If someone is likely to get hurt by the outcome, then a measure of privacy in the implementation seems reasonable.
But on other things, I don’t have a problem being open. The argument that a secret ballot lets us vote based on how we really feel rather based on political considerations doesn’t make sense to me. In a representative body, we should be voting based on political considerations. If the folks I’m representing want me to vote X, then that’s how I should vote. If I consistently vote in opposition to what the majority of members prefer, I won’t get re-elected/appointed; which is as it should be. As it happened, for that particular issue I polled my constituency—the Editors and Webmasters, as well as members of my Local Group, to find out their thoughts on the extra nights at the WG. Even though the majority thought that the AMC should be in attendance all five days and that our expenses should be covered accordingly, once at the table I attempted a compromise: if you read the minutes of that meeting, I moved to amend the original motion to say that the AMC would get only the gala banquet paid for in addition to the normal 3 nights and meals.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Dues and Retention
Some members assert that high —and always increasing—dues are negatively impacting Mensa’s membership rates. I’ve read in the ReVelle survey (the 1986 survey of former members) that high dues were the top factor (40% of respondents) in quitting. In 1986, dues were $33. Adjusted for inflation, they’d be $61.92 in 2007. According to the 2006 Local Group Funding Report, dues, which were $30 in 1982, would be $67.20 in 2006.
So using my very weak math skills, I can set a mid point of those two inflation-adjusted figures of $64.56 as what one might expect Mensa dues to be if we just kept up with inflation. In reality, our dues are $52—nearly 20% less.
So not only is AML holding the line on dues increases, there has definitely been an increase in the number of services and perqs in that time. Even just comparing the Bulletin of today with the Bulletin of 1989 (when I joined) I see huge differences. I compared the June issue from 1989 with the June issue from 2007:
1989
Total pages 33
Cover—two-color (with screens)
Number of interior pages with color—0
Non-business articles/puzzles/columns—9 pages
Letters—2.5 pages
2007
Total pages 55
Cover—four-color
Number of interior pages with color—15
Non-business articles/puzzles/columns—19 pages
Letters—3.5 pages
I’d love to know, empirically, how dues levels affect modern retention figures. Is a buck a week simply too much for some folks to pay? Do those same people who can’t afford membership also forgo buying 17 Starbucks’ lattes, ten packs of cigarettes, four DVDs or two cases of decent beer in a year? Or would it be a reasonable amount if those unhappy members were getting more bang for their bucks? I think it’s not the actual cost of membership that is at issue; it’s the perception of the value of membership after purchased.
Local and national officers and staff have really put in a great deal of effort in the last couple decades to increase the value of when members get for their dues. Bigger magazines, better LG newsletters, vibrant online communities, elaborate Web sites, dozens of cost-saving member benefit opportunities…
I wish we would do another ReVelle-type survey to see if we’re succeeding.
So using my very weak math skills, I can set a mid point of those two inflation-adjusted figures of $64.56 as what one might expect Mensa dues to be if we just kept up with inflation. In reality, our dues are $52—nearly 20% less.
So not only is AML holding the line on dues increases, there has definitely been an increase in the number of services and perqs in that time. Even just comparing the Bulletin of today with the Bulletin of 1989 (when I joined) I see huge differences. I compared the June issue from 1989 with the June issue from 2007:
1989
Total pages 33
Cover—two-color (with screens)
Number of interior pages with color—0
Non-business articles/puzzles/columns—9 pages
Letters—2.5 pages
2007
Total pages 55
Cover—four-color
Number of interior pages with color—15
Non-business articles/puzzles/columns—19 pages
Letters—3.5 pages
I’d love to know, empirically, how dues levels affect modern retention figures. Is a buck a week simply too much for some folks to pay? Do those same people who can’t afford membership also forgo buying 17 Starbucks’ lattes, ten packs of cigarettes, four DVDs or two cases of decent beer in a year? Or would it be a reasonable amount if those unhappy members were getting more bang for their bucks? I think it’s not the actual cost of membership that is at issue; it’s the perception of the value of membership after purchased.
Local and national officers and staff have really put in a great deal of effort in the last couple decades to increase the value of when members get for their dues. Bigger magazines, better LG newsletters, vibrant online communities, elaborate Web sites, dozens of cost-saving member benefit opportunities…
I wish we would do another ReVelle-type survey to see if we’re succeeding.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Some Members are Worth More?
Someone opined on a forum discussion that active members are worth more— more attention and resources and acceptance.
I was incensed.
Many Mensans go through phases throughout their membership lifetimes. When I first joined, I was young, single, and attended many things— for the fun of it. I did not lift a finger to help. Not once. I didn't even offer to clear a table of debris at the RG. I was lazy and a taker. But still I felt welcomed.
Then I got married and had babies and spent several years under a rock. I went to nothing. I tossed my Bulletins unread. I glanced at our local newsletter occasionally, but it only contained information about events I would miss and people I didn't know. However, that once-a-month paper reminder on the coffee table reassured me that there was more to me than laundry and diapers. It kept me connected, though Mensa officers didn't know I existed.
A few years later, the kids started school and I emerged from my rock. This time, I was looking for challenging projects to do that would stay done (unlike laundry) and I wanted to give something back to the group that welcomed me and kept me hooked despite my laziness and lack of participation. And I have volunteered and given thousands of hours to Mensa since then.
If anyone had told me I was not worth his time or attention in my two earlier phases, Mensa would be one volunteer poorer today. So to all you silent, seemingly inactive members I say: You are wanted. You are valued. You are needed. Mensa is here for you when you need us.
I was incensed.
Many Mensans go through phases throughout their membership lifetimes. When I first joined, I was young, single, and attended many things— for the fun of it. I did not lift a finger to help. Not once. I didn't even offer to clear a table of debris at the RG. I was lazy and a taker. But still I felt welcomed.
Then I got married and had babies and spent several years under a rock. I went to nothing. I tossed my Bulletins unread. I glanced at our local newsletter occasionally, but it only contained information about events I would miss and people I didn't know. However, that once-a-month paper reminder on the coffee table reassured me that there was more to me than laundry and diapers. It kept me connected, though Mensa officers didn't know I existed.
A few years later, the kids started school and I emerged from my rock. This time, I was looking for challenging projects to do that would stay done (unlike laundry) and I wanted to give something back to the group that welcomed me and kept me hooked despite my laziness and lack of participation. And I have volunteered and given thousands of hours to Mensa since then.
If anyone had told me I was not worth his time or attention in my two earlier phases, Mensa would be one volunteer poorer today. So to all you silent, seemingly inactive members I say: You are wanted. You are valued. You are needed. Mensa is here for you when you need us.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Executive Session Motions
Three motions were passed in Executive Session at the September 2007 AMC meeting:
1. The American Mensa Committee expresses confidence that the 2005-2007 Executive Committee, Central Alabama Mensa’s Executive Committee, the original 2007 AG Committee, the replacement members of the 2007 AG Committee, every other Mensan involved with the planning and execution of the 2007 AG, and AML’s Executive Director and National Office staff always acted in what they felt was the best interest of Mensa at the time. The AMC thanks everyone for their contributions for the 2007 Annual Gathering.
2. The American Mensa Committee expresses confidence in the ability of the Chairman, Russ Bakke, and in the ability of the First Vice Chairman, Elissa Rudolph, to properly and ethically attend to the business of the society in accord with the provisions of Federal, State, and local laws, the Constitution of Mensa, the Bylaws of American Mensa, and Actions Still in effect; to act or substitute as Chief Executive Officer for the Society; and to act as National Representatives on the International Board of Directors.
3. The AMC notes that having the ExComm appoint interim RVCs and action committee chairs is not in strict interpretation of our Bylaws. Where they have occurred, these appointments were always ratified by the full AMC, without contention, at the next regular AMC meeting. As far as we can determine, no appointed AMC member has cast a deciding vote on a closely contested issue, prior to being properly seated b the full AMC. Further, these errors were all “made in good faith.”
According to legal counsel, these non-compliant actions by the ExComm are an “immaterial breach” of our Bylaws, and therefore of no material consequence. Now that the matter has been brought to our attention, we will work within the bylaws in all future cases.
Passed.
1. The American Mensa Committee expresses confidence that the 2005-2007 Executive Committee, Central Alabama Mensa’s Executive Committee, the original 2007 AG Committee, the replacement members of the 2007 AG Committee, every other Mensan involved with the planning and execution of the 2007 AG, and AML’s Executive Director and National Office staff always acted in what they felt was the best interest of Mensa at the time. The AMC thanks everyone for their contributions for the 2007 Annual Gathering.
2. The American Mensa Committee expresses confidence in the ability of the Chairman, Russ Bakke, and in the ability of the First Vice Chairman, Elissa Rudolph, to properly and ethically attend to the business of the society in accord with the provisions of Federal, State, and local laws, the Constitution of Mensa, the Bylaws of American Mensa, and Actions Still in effect; to act or substitute as Chief Executive Officer for the Society; and to act as National Representatives on the International Board of Directors.
3. The AMC notes that having the ExComm appoint interim RVCs and action committee chairs is not in strict interpretation of our Bylaws. Where they have occurred, these appointments were always ratified by the full AMC, without contention, at the next regular AMC meeting. As far as we can determine, no appointed AMC member has cast a deciding vote on a closely contested issue, prior to being properly seated b the full AMC. Further, these errors were all “made in good faith.”
According to legal counsel, these non-compliant actions by the ExComm are an “immaterial breach” of our Bylaws, and therefore of no material consequence. Now that the matter has been brought to our attention, we will work within the bylaws in all future cases.
Passed.
College Students and Marketing
Two questions I’ve read recently are: “Why don’t we do more recruiting at top colleges?” and “What are our leaders doing to see that Mensa has a presence at those universities?”
What Mensa's leaders are doing is appointing a Development Officer and supporting his Marketing Committee and their research and projects. About two years ago, that committee (I'm on it) did a large survey of members under 40 to find out why they join and stay— to see if we can nail down what that age group wants out of Mensa. We got lots of interesting data and some surprises (I had predicted that most people joined in order to find other smart people to ...um...play with, but I was wrong).
We learned that most youthful people join to prove their intelligence and to find intellectual stimulation. They want "Mensa" to plan convenient brainy activities for little money.
What I get out of that research is this: college students are already getting more than enough intellectual stimulation, so they don't need what Mensa has to offer. But after college, those 20-somethings are looking to recapture those deep-conversation-over-coffee-at-2am days, and that's when they start looking at organizations like Mensa. So we advertise in publications aimed at that demographic with slogans like "Stimulation for the uncommon mind" and "You already belong— isn't it time you joined?"
What Mensa's leaders are doing is appointing a Development Officer and supporting his Marketing Committee and their research and projects. About two years ago, that committee (I'm on it) did a large survey of members under 40 to find out why they join and stay— to see if we can nail down what that age group wants out of Mensa. We got lots of interesting data and some surprises (I had predicted that most people joined in order to find other smart people to ...um...play with, but I was wrong).
We learned that most youthful people join to prove their intelligence and to find intellectual stimulation. They want "Mensa" to plan convenient brainy activities for little money.
What I get out of that research is this: college students are already getting more than enough intellectual stimulation, so they don't need what Mensa has to offer. But after college, those 20-somethings are looking to recapture those deep-conversation-over-coffee-at-2am days, and that's when they start looking at organizations like Mensa. So we advertise in publications aimed at that demographic with slogans like "Stimulation for the uncommon mind" and "You already belong— isn't it time you joined?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)