Re: The BAA and new BCS membership requirements

I've never felt greatly inclined to join the BCS. It seems too much
like it was trying to set itself up as the only arbitor of standards
in the British It arena - which patently it's not.

I accept your argument Dick, that we wouldn't have the money from the
conference if we hadn't been a BCS SIG at the time, but personally, if
I'd realised that all our subscriptions were just going directly into
BCS funds, I would have blocked HMW being a sustaining member for the
past twenty years. We've contributed thousands of pounds in the belief
we were keeping the BAA going, when all along we were just adding to
BCS funds.

I feel cheated.

I agree with David, if this is to be impose don us, I for one will not
join the BCS.

I'd like to point out Paul's call for "position papers", I agreed with
that at the Wiki meeting. We need to set out all of the pros and cons
of staying & leaving & see if we can have a manifesto(? not really the
correct word)for us to vote on at an EGM.

Also as the BAA membership is several hundred strong & the largest
meeting we've ever had was only 30-40, is there the possibility of
inviting votes online or by post from all these members? Tat would be
up to the BAA committee who hold the subscription lists.

Chris