As I understand it, the issue is encapsulated in the following:
"Membership of BCS Specialist Groups will become a BCS member only
benefit from May 1st this year. From that date BCS Members will be
able to join up to five Specialist Groups without incurring SG
membership charges. Some groups will continue to charge for
publications, special events and conferences and BCS members will
normally benefit from a preferential rate."
In other words, you cannot be a member of BAA only of BCS and then you
have the option of selecting BAA as one of your 5 specialist SIGs.
Therefore, I am inclined to agree that "we will lose a large number of
our members" as I do not think APL minded people will be inclined to
join the BCS (unless they already have!). Besides, BAA membership has
been shrinking over the last decade.
So, if BAA can get its funds under its own control and sever its links
with BCS, then it is worth pursuing. I doubt that this alone secures
BAA's future. Other issues arise:
1. Who controls the BAA funds?
2. Will the BAA continue with its hardcopy 'English' Vector?
3. Should BAA seek affiliation with other APL groups like the one in
France? This will enable a multi language web site.
4. Should BAA continue with a hardcopy publication or stick to doing
everything on the web? If yes, who will pay for membership?
If BAA continues with its corporate membership, I assume that it will
no longer need to levy private membership fees if it goes online
exclusively.
The advantage with the 'web only' approach is that the site can be
updated regularly and provide code downloads.
|
