But I thought people might want to see a somewhat differing opinion on several suggestions that have been discussed on the past few weeks.

Please keep in mind that these are just my personal opinions and in no way throwing any disrespect to those making the suggestions.

I also don’t intend on replying to any comments as I intend on taking a break from reading the chipboard again like I did last year for a while.

Not “Taking my ball and going home” just eliminating some of the stress while I deal with more important issues.

1) Putting the magazine online.
I am actually not completely opposed to this idea.
As other have mentioned it’s not a new one and something that has been brought up numerous times in the past in various forms.

It has been suggested to cut the magazine back to 3 issues, to maybe do 2 online and 2 in print and more recently to to all issues online only.

Having been on boards where this discussion took place I can assure everyone it has been a topic of discussion during many board meetings.

I even remember sending out a survey to the membership about 10 years ago where the overwhelming majority of membership wanted to keep the printed magazine.

Now times have changed and I believe this topic should be discussed once again. Maybe it has been but no longer being on the board, I don’t know for sure.

I personally believe that the majority of membership today would be open to having at the very least a 1/2 and 1/2 online and printed magazine and maybe even 100%.

Possibly it can even be worked out to still allow printed magazines to those that want it with a higher membership fee than those that wanted it online.

In the past that seemed not feasible but not sure what the logistics would be today.

2) Executive Director.
This is another idea that I believe is a good one in theory and another that has been discussed in board meetings several times.

I spent a long time talking with Westen at the convention and have a ton of respect for him as this was his initial idea.

As discussed the issue was never with the idea, but with how we can make it happen. I think we all agree that hiring an executive director will cost the club at least $75k-$100k a year and possibly more.
While the initial thought is it would pay for itself, there were a lot of people (including myself to be transparent) that didn’t think we could make it work.

To compound the issue the organization of the club was based on volunteers. Opening the door to paid positions might not be well accepted. What about the Magazine editors, the treasurer and membership officer, the convention chair? Those folks and many more spend an insane amount of time working for the club yet are unpaid positions.

How would the volunteers feel about paying someone to do a job when they themselves are working for free?

Now I am not saying this cant be worked out and the idea has actually grown on me. But there is a lot of discussion that needs to take place and things need to be worked out before that can happen. And that is before we even think about coming up with the funds to pay this person who would be tasked with coming up with thousands of new members.

3) Killing the MOGH.
This suggestion is the one I struggle with the most. Again I have a ton of respect for people like Jim Kruse, Andy Hughes, Steve Cutler and many others who support the idea.

However being a long time supporter of the MOGH this troubles me for several reasons.

I don’t disagree with a lot of the comments made but I also see a lot of the positive things that the MOGH has accomplished over the past 20 years.

The exhibits are in my opinion huge for the hobby. I don’t think anyone will argue exposing our hobby to others is a bad thing.

Many dont realize how close the MOGH actually came to having a home on several occasions.

While we may never get the large donations needed to have a brick and mortar MOGH I would love to see more exhibits and even a virtual museum which has been discussed several times.

So, while I can see some changes to the MOGH being done like a reorganization or even requirements of all expenditures to be approved my the CCA board, I am not sure I would support completely disbanding the MOGH.

That name is now established and I believe will help us in future endeavors with new exhibits and partnerships with other museums.

Then there is the issue of what to do with MOGH assets if it is ended.

Some people will say just move all remaining funds into the club accounts.
But keep in mind that a majority of the donations, both cash and items were made to be earmarked for the mogh. How will those people feel about their donation being moved into the clubs general account?

Who will continue to maintain the exhibits and organize new ones? Is the CCA board prepared to take that work on in addition to the regular duties.

What about those that paid for life memberships to the MOgH? Will those payments be returned. Will all the items I and others that have donated to the MOGH be returned?

I guess my real question is what is the downside to allowing the MOGH to continue its efforts? Don’t want additional funding on exhibits…… make the club board the funding decision makers (they already are on any significant expenditures)

Want additional oversight…. Fine do some reorganization

Who takes on organizing exhibits at the convention, the seminars, the chipguide, the library (yes I know this is rarely used anymore) and other items. Someone has to do these things and whether you call it a MOGH or something else, it will still have to exist right?

The MOGH is just a committee of the CCA no matter what you call it.

I get it, people are disappointed in the direction currently. They would like to see more production and I think a lot of people would have loved to see a building by now.

But I am honestly opposed to doing away completely with what is basically the educational portion of the club. I guess I don’t see any harm in it continuing.

Again just my opinions and that’s basically all I have to say on the subject.