Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!csi.uottawa.ca!news
From: cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne (055908))
Subject: Re: Feedback to the Forth Interest Group
Message-ID: <1991Mar30.055506.14287@csi.uottawa.ca>
Keywords: n
Sender: news@csi.uottawa.ca
Nntp-Posting-Host: prgc
Organization: CSI Dept., University of Ottawa
References: <2558.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 05:55:06 GMT

>Oh yeah?  Well, I can think of another: get a debate going right here on
>ForthNet.  State your objections and what you think should happen, and back it
>up by saying that you WILL take your money and your reputation in the Forth
>community and go home IF things do not get solved.
>
>This medium allows FIG members outside the range of the FIG business meetings
>held in the Bay Area to comminicate with the leadership, and to be counted as
>wanting to see a change.  In other words, state your case and challenge fellow
>members who agree with you to Speak Up.  Those who fail to use this medium are
>throwing the opportunity away.
>
>Jack Woehr tried to make up for this apathy by turning up the hysteria in his
>campaign for financial disclosure.  Instead, let the leadership learn that the
>disaffection is real (people WILL quit) and they will realize that they could
>have worse problems on their hands (especially the financial kind).  Gorbachev
>was not the first to adopt glasnost as a last resort, nor will he be the
>last...

OK, I'll think about cranking up some desire for disclosure.  I'm one of
those that DID send in my $30, BUT I included a note to whoever may be at
the office that I'd like to see some improvements in the area of financial
disclosure.

I present as a GOOD example the report in SIGFORTH.  They prepared a
statement showing '90 Budget versus Actual versus Budget '91 (or maybe
my dating's a little off...).  They admitted that SOME of the numbers
that they used to build the budgets were not terribly meaningful, and
that some of the categorizations weren't great.  Overall, I thought
the report was VERY WELL DONE (and I speak from the experience of having
spent some years in public accounting, and having prepared more sets
of financial statements than I care to count.  Hundreds too many, but
that's another story...).

They did a good job of showing that they want to be seen as both
trustworthy and accountible for their spending.  When did FIG last
send a general financial report to its members?  That's NOT a rhetorical
question - I've been a member about three years, and haven't really seen
any hard info. in that time.  Was the last report in the '80s?  Or when?
<jax> may have acted a little too strongly in publicizing "doom and
gloom," but that DID put the ball in FIG's court.  FIG's board COULD have
come out and shown that the fiscal situation IS ok.  But the ONLY thing
I've seen is the indirect information from the early renewal notice, that
seems to imply some form of financial difficulties.  I may be
misinterpreting the renewal notice - but those that produced the notice
SHOULD have thought about that possibility.

I've heard rumour that SOME of the reason for avoiding reporting things
is that the GENIE involvement required some sort of nondisclosure
agreement about related revenues.  That doesn't release FIG from
its obligations vis a vis its OTHER activities.  What does FORTH
DIMENSIONS cost to produce?  What are the impacts of the book/software
sales?  Is my money being well-spent?

My '91 fees may be in, but '92 is certainly up in the air.  I haven't
been a member long enough to have gotten SERIOUSLY disaffected, but
another year may bother me enough to consider witholding...

-- 
Christopher Browne
cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca
University of Ottawa
Master of System Science Program
