I think Phil Brennion's post here re The AAW on line survey indicates
his acknowledgement of an important relationship between internet
woodturning groups and AAW. Many here belong to both. Instead of AAW you
could insert that worshipful guild across the pond or any other, though
perhaps less pious, turning association. The need for an internet survey
got me to musing about growth of such organizations. I thought about the
parallel of the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) to which I belonged
for many years. Consider your own special interests, there are plenty to
go around. Please remember that I'm musing from my armchair on a Sunday
afternoon while waiting for the football game to begin. I'm not
criticizing or suggesting a better way, nor am I deploring or
celebrating growth of organizations.

In the beginning people with a common interest find one another and
gradually become loosely organized and share information, but mostly
socialize. As the 'Robert's Rules of Order' types do their thing,
trustees & officers arise. A sporadic mimeographed newsletter ensues and
if the endeavors that provoked the mutual interest increase in
importance, the group prospers. Just as a moderately successful
business cannot remain static the group must grow or it withers. It
grows and the inevitable cycle begins. The newsletter becomes a house
organ, then a journal. Funds are needed to support a better and slicker
publication as expenses of an initially lean supporting cast and
properties increase. Dues are collected, ads sold and paraphernalia
huckstered. Often "Official Stamps of Approval or Compliance" are
'suggested' to merchants to assure quality equipment for members to buy.
Subsets of interest divide and multiply. At first separate sections of
the 'Journal' (QST for radio buffs) serve them but finally they break
away into separate publications. From speciality pamphlets follow books
devoted to a single topic followed by magazines devoted to specific
sub-groups and experts who know more and more (maybe about less and
less) proliferate. The original loosely knit jolly group has morphed
into a large serious amorphous 'business' whose membership barely
recognize one another. The organization is now a large full fledged
publishing house with a flashy magazine included to justify dues. Annual
meetings with trade shows and entrance fees help pick up the tab and
ward off outgrowing the blood supply, _ but local clubs are the life
blood. All the new members are not only joyfully welcomed; they are a
necessity. The fewer and fewer generalists and traditionalists take
potshots at the specialists and progressives. The splintered factions
react and there's little effort to appreciate diversity and trends.
Positions harden and the happy enthusiasm of yesterday become today's
tiresome issues, debated 'ad nauseam'.

I am not disgruntled and I don't think that a healthy and growing AAW is
a paradigm for my lugubrious musings. It may never be, but there cannot
be any answers if there aren't any questions, and questions do not arise
without wondering. I applaud the AAW survey and thank Phil for inviting
RCW to join in. FWIW, Arch

Fortiter,

Arch,

I agree with you - I think :-/

I belong to both a local club and the AAW. I find value in both
memberships: instruction, news, knowledge, friendships, and inspiration.
At the local level, I have now grown to the point whre I can give back to
others who are where I was a few years ago. I don't see either group as
serving its own interests beyond what the members want/need. The problem,
as Phil points out, is figuring out what the members want/need.

I get most of the same from r.c.w., WOW, WoodCentral, etc. as well. I just
wish we didn't have so many fractured groups with which to keep up.

Joe Fleming - San Diego
===================================
"Arch" wrote in message
...
I think Phil Brennion's post here re The AAW on line survey indicates
his acknowledgement of an important relationship between internet
woodturning groups and AAW. Many here belong to both. Instead of AAW you
could insert that worshipful guild across the pond or any other, though
perhaps less pious, turning association. The need for an internet survey
got me to musing about growth of such organizations. I thought about the
parallel of the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) to which I belonged
for many years. Consider your own special interests, there are plenty to
go around. Please remember that I'm musing from my armchair on a Sunday
afternoon while waiting for the football game to begin. I'm not
criticizing or suggesting a better way, nor am I deploring or
celebrating growth of organizations.

In the beginning people with a common interest find one another and
gradually become loosely organized and share information, but mostly
socialize. As the 'Robert's Rules of Order' types do their thing,
trustees & officers arise. A sporadic mimeographed newsletter ensues and
if the endeavors that provoked the mutual interest increase in
importance, the group prospers. Just as a moderately successful
business cannot remain static the group must grow or it withers. It
grows and the inevitable cycle begins. The newsletter becomes a house
organ, then a journal. Funds are needed to support a better and slicker
publication as expenses of an initially lean supporting cast and
properties increase. Dues are collected, ads sold and paraphernalia
huckstered. Often "Official Stamps of Approval or Compliance" are
'suggested' to merchants to assure quality equipment for members to buy.
Subsets of interest divide and multiply. At first separate sections of
the 'Journal' (QST for radio buffs) serve them but finally they break
away into separate publications. From speciality pamphlets follow books
devoted to a single topic followed by magazines devoted to specific
sub-groups and experts who know more and more (maybe about less and
less) proliferate. The original loosely knit jolly group has morphed
into a large serious amorphous 'business' whose membership barely
recognize one another. The organization is now a large full fledged
publishing house with a flashy magazine included to justify dues. Annual
meetings with trade shows and entrance fees help pick up the tab and
ward off outgrowing the blood supply, _ but local clubs are the life
blood. All the new members are not only joyfully welcomed; they are a
necessity. The fewer and fewer generalists and traditionalists take
potshots at the specialists and progressives. The splintered factions
react and there's little effort to appreciate diversity and trends.
Positions harden and the happy enthusiasm of yesterday become today's
tiresome issues, debated 'ad nauseam'.

I am not disgruntled and I don't think that a healthy and growing AAW is
a paradigm for my lugubrious musings. It may never be, but there cannot
be any answers if there aren't any questions, and questions do not arise
without wondering. I applaud the AAW survey and thank Phil for inviting
RCW to join in. FWIW, Arch

Fortiter,