APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2007-07 > 1183665090


From: "Elizabeth Shown Mills" <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Why do genealogists disenfranchise themselves?
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 14:52:47 -0500
In-Reply-To: <200707051828.l65ISC7e020352@mail.rootsweb.com>


Melinde:
>Somebody please explain to me why you would be part of a genealogical
society that has a closed board of governance, takes your money, and doesn't
offer any accountability for their actions?
>What is going on?

Melinde,

I have no answers, but I a theory: The answer to your question lies in
another question: Why did people join these societies in the first place?
Why would someone in Kalamazoo, Abilene, or Montgomery, *want* to belong to
a society based in Boston or New York City?

Most, I expect, join for the same reason that they "join" (i.e., pay money)
to Ancestry or Footnote. They want information on their ancestors. They pay
money for "membership" and they get access to information. When they pay
money to Ancestry or Footnote, they do not expect to "vote" on how business
is conducted. The only "vote" they expect to have is their decision to renew
or not renew.

For most, I suspect, this is the situation they actually prefer. Some NEHGS
and NYG&B members who reside in the Boston and New York areas can and do
feel a sense of ownership in the society for all the reasons that people
join area societies everywhere. But even on the local levels, most
genealogical society members prefer not to get involved in administrative
matters. They join for what they can get OUT of the societies--typically the
opportunity to attend instructive meetings and, usually, a publication that
offers information on local families. They are perfectly content to let
"those folks who like to run things" go right ahead and run things, because
THEY "just want to do genealogy."

As the venerable societies have expanded to take in great numbers who reside
at a great distance, that broader membership--I suspect--has no core sense
of belonging to something they can feel is theirs. They do not feel they can
make a difference. Most do not vote or return proxies in the first place. If
"those who like to run things" tell them that finances are critical and a
sizable expense could be eliminated by not mailing out ballots and proxies,
they see that as sensible. After all, if expenses can be cut without cutting
access to information, that sounds like a lot better idea than continuing to
call them "members" and then raising membership fees to pay for mailing the
ballots and the proxies that, in their view, change nothing in the first
place.

All of which is not to say that I agree with this viewpoint. However, you
ask "Why?" so I am responding with what I have observed.

Elizabeth

------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG
*Evidence: Citation & Analysis for the Family Historian*
(Evidence's "briefcase edition" which will still stay in print)
*Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts
to Cyberspace* (the "desktop reference edition" scheduled
for release at the FGS conference)
*QuickSheet: Citing Online Historical Resource, Evidence Style*
*Professional Genealogy: A Manual for Researchers,
Writers, Editors, Lecturers & Librarians*


This thread: