cpolk

original text found here:

So, Michael Burstein finally noticed.

On the 25th of march, I was writing an email to a member of SFWA who was asking a question that I thought I could answer, even though I am not a member of SFWA. it was an explanation on why the sfwa newsgroups and SFWA's web presence can be descibed as charmingly quaint to someone like me - how I use my computers and the internet, and other happy things. and in the midst of the message I was saying, "even if it were a phpbb that would be far better - and why doesn't sfwa have an LJ community?"

then thought, "wait, what if they do?" and looked it up. I discovered that the community had been made scant hours before. I was a little disturbed by that - I mean, lj has been around for many years. I'm an Early Adopter of LJ, and the real strength to me has always been about how the journals link. I've seen a lot of talk of how SFWA was a significant presence on GEnie in the days of the longago, and that would have made the organization an early adopter of the communication mode.

But, never mind. I set the community to *watch* as I would like to keep track of how it progressed, and there I was - the very first person to join the sfwa community. Yes. Me. *little wave*

and I thought, oh dear, won't mabfan be surprised that he has a watcher already? probably he hasn't said anything about it at all. and that sparked off another idea in my head--

because there is this conversation going on in the sfwa election blog (not a newsgroup) that I can't actually participate in, but I watch with great interest, because it could mean that I might join SFWA after all.

Depending on what happens. and one of the things that I wondered is - do these folks have any idea how many people there are out there who are not members of SFWA who are *interested* in the doings of SFWA - without getting into the myriad of explanations as to what that interest is for every individual.

so the idea that sparked is, "well, we could *show* them." and then also, "and we can show them how going to where the people are already networked can *work* in their favour."

one of the problems with SFWA's community presence - the site is tucked away in a corner of the internets where only people who are looking for it will find it. but that's not the best way to take advantage of what I jokingly called "the new internet" and I decided to demonstrate it.

So I told a couple of my friends.

And I posted the news to my lj, and asked people to pass it on.

I did this on the 25th of march, just before I took off to spend a weeks vacation with my absolute favorite Hugo nominee and the best cat in the world. I asked people to join the community just to show their interest - to become a member if you are an SFWA member, and simply to watch if you are not a member but to have your presence as an interested party and possibly potential member counted. and that if you thought this was worth passing on, please post to your own journal.

well, it hasn't even been a week, and there are (not counting the founder of the community) 9 SFWA members and 77 interested persons who are not members of SFWA, as a result of my one livejournal post pointing people to the presence of that community, as a demonstration of how effective LJ could be for sfwa's outreach and visibility efforts. because face it, I am not ultra-famous LJ citizen with loads of whuffie. I'm just one of the kids, and a little bit of effort started this particular ball rolling. if one of my other friends had decided to post about it, there would have been many, many more people listed on that profile page now.

but, anyway. mabfan has come back. and made a special exception to his posting rules, and made a post in the community visible to the public. in it, he asks, "how the hell did you guys find me?"

...and then made it so that non members could not post comments to the community and answer the damned question, even though it is plain that he wishes to know WHO WAS FIRST. dude, THAT WAS ME. but you want me to tell you in an email where no one else can see the answer, or what you reply to me.

No sir, I will not. One of the things that makes a large sized box of handmade chocolates more appealing than your sfwa membership is that I abhor the knee jerk behind closed doors secrecy about THE MOST TRIVIAL THINGS that have to do with the organization. I will not trust that writing an email to you will fulfill what I want this whole affair to do - make it plain to existing members of SFWA that keeping abreast of what the internet is now can help the organization stay appealing, and to show that there are more people interested in SFWA than you might think - but are so far unwilling to make the commitment of joining. But I am not going to tuck that statement away where it can disappear into the haze of secrecy that dismays so many of us. I have it right here, and anyone who is a livejournal member or has a typekey identity is welcome to comment if they wish.

And while I am here, let me say that when tanaise asked the candidates to tell her why she should join as a member... well, pointing her to the FAQ written by the current president was a tragic, utterly tragic, response. you see, she's read it. I've read it. I was hoping that somebody would realize that the answer given in the FAQ is an answer that alienates the potential membership instead of attracting them. that the answers given in that faq are actually offensive to me and others like me. In the first message that I had originally written in response to an SFWA board member, I said "so if you want people like me - and I'm not assuming for a second that you actually do - "

well, let's say that my assumption is still unchanged.

---

(on the John Scalzi is not pro enough for this or fan enough for that - this morning, I explained what an apa was to someone. I also included my statement that grasped my understanding of the concept: "this is what you did in the olden days, before citadel.net." this makes me painfully neo and crusty old at the same time.)