> than "Re: Contents of Wikimediauk-l digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> > 1. Re: UK chapter membership numbers (Charles Matthews) 2. UK
> > chapter membership numbers (John Byrne) 3. Re: UK chapter membership
> > numbers (Katie Chan) 4. Re: UK chapter membership nu
ews) 2. UK chapter
> membership numbers (John Byrne) 3. Re: UK chapter membership numbers (Katie
> Chan) 4. Re: UK chapter membership numbers (Richard Nevell)
>
> --------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 14:25:51 +0100 (BST)
> From: Charles Matthews
> To:
Today's Topics:
> 1. Re: UK chapter membership numbers (Charles Matthews) 2. UK chapter
> membership numbers (John Byrne) 3. Re: UK chapter membership numbers (Katie
> Chan) 4. Re: UK chapter membership numbers (Richard Nevell)
>
> --------------
>
> Message:
As very often in recent years, I got a notification of my post sent an hour or so ago, with completely blank text. Yet Katie has clearly seen it, as she quotes me. Have others also got blanks? Can the rather cryptic instructions for replies be clarified, or is there some bug? I get the digest ve
Thanks Stevie. We are trying to work on an integrated communications and
membership strategy to grow the membership further. As always there are
capacity issues as to what we can do with the number of staff and funding
we have, but I am always willing to listen to people's ideas for how we
could re
Exactly what Katie says. The chapter can't win here. It gets criticised if
membership doesn't grow because some see it as a kind of failure. Then,
when the chapter grows its membership it is seen as some kind of entryist
threat. I find it particularly notable that these criticisms come from the
sam
Dear Fae,
My memory could be failing me, but I thought it was explained at the AGM
that the increase was a result of asking donors to become members.
It sounds like you are more interested in the 'how' of the process and the
'who' as you seem dissatisfied with the answer to *why* there was an
inc
Oh I don't know, maybe this "yawning gap" wouldn't be so wide if the chapter
don't get criticised for both not increasing its membership numbers and having
increased its membership numbers.
Just a wide guess
KTC
Sent from my Samsung device___
As I recall, the "successful membership drive" consisted in offering donors to convert some of their donation into a chapter sub. I doubt anyone knows who most of them are, and I doubt a high proportion know much about the movement or the chapter, beyond the experience of a reader. Some of course
> On 10 April 2018 at 11:41 Fæ wrote:
>
> It appears that the jump in numbers was a one-off event, there has
> been no continued growth since whatever happened.
I don't know what happened. I did correspond with the office about a prompt to
renew. One could simulate such a "one-off event" by si
Yes, at the AGM the tripling of membership numbers was explained as
being due to an increase in members joining. No meaningful facts were
presented to the members, but the impression given by the Chair and
the CEO was that there would be more information publicly available.
My question was "why".
Dear Fae,
As was explained at the AGM the increase in the number of members was the
result of a successful membership drive.
Regards,
Richard Nevell
On 9 Apr 2018 21:34, "Fæ" wrote:
During the last UK Chapter AGM, it was asked why the membership
numbers had radically changed, there was no spe
During the last UK Chapter AGM, it was asked why the membership
numbers had radically changed, there was no specific answer to the
question. Was any analysis done on this afterwards? When reviewing
membership it seems likely that the charity's trustees would have been
concerned at these figures so
13 matches
Mail list logo