|
|
|
I responded at leangth earlier on one aspect of the discussion (why the voter turnout was only 18%), but as the discussion as gone on I see other interesting issues raised and questions asked. Two main topics have spurred my juices: Voter Turnout and Membership.
Rick Armstrong asked the question how can we motivate more voters? In the spirit of full disclosure, the issue of voter turnout (in ational elections) was the competitive issue one of the semesters I was in intercollegiate debate in college. As a result I had to do a lot of sresearch on the issue of voter turnout, how it is motivated, what are the negative effects etc. All of that has been running thru my head this afternoon, so thanks Rick for mucking up my day 
.
In truth Rick's question is better than the more predictable "how can we increase voter turnout". There are lots of ways to negatively increase voter tournout. There are also many controversial issues involved historically in the area of voter turnout. At one large competition, the participants were polled as to which side of the issue they agreed with, and which side of the issue they would rather argue in competition. A slim majority preferred increasing voter involvement, but over 80% preferred to argue against the issue. The reason was simple, there is so many wonderful arguments and quotes to support that unpopular position.
My favorite wasn't the nazi, or soviet, or slavery arguments, or even the nixon argument. I loved the simple example from the movie One flew over the cuckoo's nest. Jack Nicholson wanted to watch the world series on TV. The nurses said that everybody had to agree. Jack pursuaded everyone to support the idea. However the evil nurse pointed out that the patients who were basically out of it and bedridden, had not agreed. Nurse nasty had in effect expanded the voter base, and assured an election result contrary to the wishes of the electorate.
Now that I have bored everybody away from this post, the question Rick asks is how to motivate. This presumes that they are already members of the voting class. It further presumes that there are members who would vote if motivated to do so. I am of the opinion that negative campaigning hardens the resolve of the dedicated on both sides of an issue, and to turn away the moderate or the silent masses. Sadly, I also suspect that that it is intentional by some. In a club election, I think Joe Pavlik's campaign may have cost the club a small number of members. It was mean, ugly, and served no purpose. But if the two candidates had been both legitimate and negative (imagine a blood fued race between Jim and Belinda), could have generated more voters, but would have had a severe detrimental effect.
My point is, people aren't motivated by negative campaigning. So how to motivate? The goal should be to motivate members to become more involved generally, hopefully resulting in more members who have a vested interest in the outcome of the various elections. While it is easy to cross over ito the issue of increasing or retention of membership at this point, I am going to try and deal with them separately.
The club does some things very well; the magazine is wonderful, the convention is great, and the club website is very good about being informative. Could any of these be improved, it would be hubris to suggest they could not, but I give credit to those who are handling these projects, they work very hard all year long to try and make them better. And for the inevitable questio of what I would do to improve them, I have no answer, but if and when I do, I will share it in an appropriate manner. I encourage all of you to do so on any issue. I have found the club officers and other heads to be very open to constructive comments.
I think the trick will be to find another hook that expands the potential opportunities, but does not detract from the already positive activities.
Membership is not an easy job. It seems that Ralph had three basic responsibilities (Sunday will get them soon). The administrative obligations (maintaining membership info, collecting dues, making sure that the mags got delivered etc) is the first and possibly the biggest dog on the porch. They are also the job responsibilities as outlined in the bylaws. These jobs must be done simply to administer the club, and failure in them results in a lot of negative attitudes. Some clubs put the responsibility of collecting dues with the treasurer, freeing up time for the membership officer to do other things. My dad is the editor of a club mag and he is also responsible for insuring delivery etc. I mention these other ways only to show that there are many ways to devide up the responsibilities.
But the membership director is also expected (because of the title if nothing else) to maintain the old members and to generate new members. In my law fraternity (yes I was a member of an academic fraternity in law school) these were the only responsibilities of the membership director. The other responsibiliites were assigned to other officers (primarily the treasurer and the secretary). Jim Follis advocated creating a position subordinate to the membership director to deal with attracting new members, and I think perhaps retetion could be added to that (he said he had a person in mind for the job, I always wondered who that was). I do think it is fair to expect all officers to strive to assist in both those areas, as well as any member who regards themselves as active and committed.
We will never be a club with a hundred thousand current members, nor do I think we would want to be. We are a niche hobby, and if the club gets to big, it would be at risk of moving away from the very things that make it appealing, at least to me. But finding ways to 'motivate' members to remain, or non members to join (see I told you there was a crossover) is necessary to keep the club vibrant and new ideas flowing. I joined the club 3 and a half years ago, and my number is 6315. I don't know whether I am considered a younger member or an old salt (I am as of last december eligible for LM). But look at the folks who have come into the club since me. They represent lots of ages, lots of economic backgrounds, lots of diversity (just like them ol boys-and the ladies as well-who helped create the club). New members are vital.
I hope all the discussion on these issues generates some new ideas, and maybe motivates folks to work on these issues. Here is hoping that the discussion remains constructive, and that we all remember we all love the hobby and want to make it better. That is JOB ONE.
|
|
