Right on Jim. Well said.
Regards, Stan doore
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 9:50 PM
Subject: [USMA:42025] Re: Integrating infrastructure rebuilding with
metrication
Whoa! First of all, I do NOT speak for USMA leadership. I speak only for
myself. Secondly, I am indeed a USMA member while, I suspect, many who
participate on this free mail list have not paid to join USMA. But, I am
only a member, not an officer of USMA.
Secondly, USMA does do a lot of good work. Those who are members and
receive Metric Today are familiar with some of that work. I have joined
our President, Lorelle Young, on some of her efforts as a representative
of USMA. So, having observed her skilled and effective work, I am assured
that those efforts I have not witnessed (but know about) are done equally
as well. As a representative of an organization, Ms. Young's have more
effect than those of individuals. In fact, USMA is often sought out for
advice and information; Ms. Young provides it.
Third, USMA does more than speak to Washington. It speaks to many people
and many organizations around the U.S. (and some outside the U.S., I'm
sure). It provides resources for teachers. It provides this free mail list
that you and many others enjoy. It provides a certification program. It
participates in standards development (e.g., with IEEE Standards
Association) And it preserves the continuum of historical documentation of
metrication in the U.S.
Fourth, you might want to consider the costs before suggesting that we
need to become a lobby organization. Even to hire a registered lobbyist to
spend part of his or her time on our behalf would likely cost a couple
hundred thousand dollars each year. Would you like to chip in the first
$1000? And again next year? I'll put you and Ezra down. Now just line up a
couple hundred more people to match your contributions and we'll start
rolling!
Now, those are just my views. Yours may differ. And so might USMA's.
Jim
Victor Jockin wrote:
I don't know the extent to which Jim speaks for USMA leadership in
general, but if USMA's strategy for achieving its stated objective is in
fact the approach outlined under his point 2 below, I feel pretty stupid
for having sent membership fees to this organization. We can all write
our letters without being members of USMA, and no doubt will. So if such
individual actions are in fact "the brunt" of the effort, why not just
disband?
USMA leadership cannot be blamed for failing to have an impact given
their budget and resources. If we really are "a volunteer organization
and not a registered lobbying group", no leadership could have made a
difference anyway. What is less clear to me is why there does appear to
be any recognition of the futility of this approach, nor any attempt to
change course.
Seeking funding and hiring professionals should be the focus of USMA
leadership today. That's an answer to Ezra's question "I'm wondering
what USMA is doing" that might justify our membership dues.
--------------------------------------------------
From: "James Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 11/23/2008 4:17 PM
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:42021] Re: Integrating infrastructure rebuilding with
metrication
2. USMA is mostly a volunteer organization and not a registered lobbying
group. USMA's leadership does indeed do some strategic whispering in
ears, but the brunt of the work is done and should be done by its
members.
--
James R. Frysinger
632 Stony Point Mountain Road
Doyle, TN 38559-3030
(H) 931.657.3107
(C) 931.212.0267
