triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: VTR Site Restricted

To: "Blake J. Discher" <bdischer@blakedischer.com>
Subject: Re: VTR Site Restricted
From: Michael Porter <portermd@zianet.com>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 23:07:46 -0600
Blake J. Discher wrote:

> At 12:13 PM 5/20/2005, Bob Danielson wrote:
> 
>> When/why did VTR.org decide to restrict the maintenance section to 
>> members only? Did the people who wrote these articles know that 
>> distribution was going to be restricted and not available to everyone? 
>> I'm just curious for the rationale behind it.
> 
> 
> Hello listers,
> 
> Earlier today I responded in detail to Bob Danielson's inquiry and 
> copied the list, but the reply never made it to the list, perhaps due to 
> its length.  If you are interested in reading my reply, it is at: 
> <http://www.vtr.org/danielsonReply.htm>.

Have read the reasoning behind the decision. Sorry, but I don't agree. 
Bad idea, Blake.

Doubt it will increase membership, and it might just put people off from 
joining. I notice on the front page that VTR has "over 2,200 members." 
Isn't that down from about 3,000 four years ago?

Hell, I might not be one of those people who needs the technical pages 
at all often, but I've been a prior member, and now I can't view them. 
I've been out of work seventeen months--renewing my VTR membership is 
way, way down on my list of needs.

Did you poll the people supplying the articles and ask them what they 
thought about your intentions? From your reply, it doesn't seem so.

The issue of bandwidth is a legitimate one--but the VTR ought to be 
picking that up as a cost of advertising.

As for site management requiring volunteer help, that's pretty much the 
case with every aspect of the VTR and its chapters, is it not? I'm not 
denigrating your assistance with the site by saying that--but I am 
pointing out that volunteer effort with the site is not exceptional to 
what goes on in all of the VTR's various other functions.

The worst aspect of this decision, however, is that it furthers a 
continuing trend in the VTR (which I think is reflected in declining 
membership) to favoring the preservation aspects of the hobby, rather 
than favoring the people who drive their cars regularly and maintain 
their cars themselves--it denies them the information they need to do 
that unless they have the additional disposable income for membership.

Geez, when I owned my first Triumph, I didn't have two spare nickels to 
rub together most of the time--it was my only transportation--and nearly 
forty years ago, as a new owner of a used Spitfire, trying to keep the 
car together and running myself, I really could have used a resource 
such as the Maintenance Handbook. That may not be the case today for the 
majority of Triumph owners, but it's no way to _develop_ the hobby.

Look at the example of this mailing list--it runs on volunteer effort, 
too, and on voluntary contributions to keep it going. Nevertheless, it 
(and its rather valuable archives) are available to everyone. That's 
because the guy running it likes the cars, and likes the people who do 
the same. The VTR, by locking people out of information on the cars, 
sends the message that it is only interested in the people who can 
afford it.

You really should reconsider.

Cheers.

-- 
Never let anyone drive you crazy when you know it's within walking 
distance....




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>