APG-L ArchivesArchiver > APG > 2008-01 > 1200870775
Subject: Re: [APG] Jones APGQ article
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:12:55 EST
Rondina's points are well-taken. But, I am wary of APG (or a similar group)
getting in the business of judging portfolios. BCG does a pretty good job
of that. I do lean toward APG aiming at a somewhat narrower audience than it
does now, but I'm wary of setting up experience/education/performance
standards for membership. I think APG should serve professionals in the genealogy
business, but am not at all sure it should be in the business evaluating
qualifications for membership. I do agree with Rondina, however, that an APG with
a narrower target audience can still serve a wide range of genealogists
through educational programs and things like this very discussion list. Whatever
else we do, we should help people be good genealogists.
Also, please note: I am not advocating an increase in APG dues. I talked
about $220 dues in order to make a point about the value decision people make
when they consider joining an organization. When the price goes up, people
think twice about joining. It is, in fact, possible that some kind of
two-tiered dues structure might make sense at some time.
Saint Paul, MN
**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.