Quote:
Originally Posted by Deadhead
I am sure there are a good number of you who are members of this organization. Though that number is declining. I am interested to know everybody's thoughts on it. I applied for a board position there and am getting a run-around that is akin to something I would expect in a govt. setting. I am not looking to change the world here, but it looks to me like the numbers are unsustainable and without some younger (under 40) people coming in this thing is going to go the way of the dodo bird. I am not in the under 40 set, but I do remember it clearly.
The organization is asking for clues as to why the membership is declining, and I cited the bureaucracy as part of the problem as well as a website that was like an empty warehouse with a tech section where questions go unanswered for weeks months or never.
In thinking about the future of the organization, I was wondering if there was any interest or consideration pertaining to a collaboration with PY. This could be a benefit to both organizations as they seek to strengthen their membership and security in a world where magazines and private websites are increasingly under pressure. Not sure how this would work, but there is no way to know without some kind of dialog. There are strengths with both that could obviously benefit one another. Don't know if there is any 'history' here or not, and don't really care either. In interest of fostering the future of the hobby politics are not part of the equation - only a way to make sure we connect the knowledge with the need in keeping these bad boys on the road and shining in the sun at shows.
If folks share their experience and criticism here, it will also give them a better idea beyond the criticisms I poignantly illustrated in my re-application, which will likely land in File 13. But, that is beside the point. If they get a picture of what the problem is maybe someone more diplomatic than me will be able to help. I have just seen time and again that organizations die under their own organizational weight when that becomes more important than their original purpose. In this case that would be the joy of working on and driving Pontiacs not paperwork and parliamentary procedure.
The flood gates are now open!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deadhead
Here is what was sent to me on November 7 AFTER I submitted a form application in AUGUST containing all of the information requested again here:
If you are interested in being considered for the ballot please complete the following questions. The deadline for responding with the answers to these questions is November 15, 2013.
If you are selected by the committe (Mike Darr, Jack Anderson and myself) you will need to provide us with the write-up of what you wish to have printed in the Smoke Signals about your candidacy and a "mud shot", something similar to a passport photo) no later than November 30, 2013.
Then there was a list of 8 questions to be answered in "resume format". Last time I reviewed 200+ resumes there were a whole lotta formats there, so I was not exactly clear on that. I was approached by members of the administration in the summer and submitted my application according to their instructions.
My experience has lead me to the conclusion that there is way too much focus on the process and not enough communication within or focus on the actual purpose which is the cars and the people. There may be too many people involved in the administration? While I clearly understand the need for some uniformity, putting a truck load of formality in a CAR CLUB is not the way to go. I MIGHT be a little paranoid, but I would say that sending me a request to re-apply a week before the thing is due after I submitted my application that long ago might just be a little political stonewalling. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Combine that with the ambiguous definition of the format and the fact that the board them limits it down to only 2 selections for each region to be on the ballot, and you have a set-up which could significantly limit the membership's ability to have access to and choose the people they want to run the organization and its shape going forward.
Unlike others, I am not going to keep my experiences and opinions close to the vest. This is what has lead to the current situation.
|
No surprise as to the runaround IMO. POCI is their own worst enemy. Although there are several excellent PY members who are attempting to resuscitate POCI from its' death spiral, the damage has already been done by a few bad Officer apples.
Unfortunately there are also more than a few POCI model specific "expert" and contributers who openly denigrate and ridicule in writing in these very forums anyone who has a differing point of view, or information they disagree with. The '73-77 ABody "angry expert" is the blatant example to me. Others here will show love for the same I wouldn't waste time with due to their constant negative turnoff.
Why would I continue to support an organization with my time and $ run by people I don't like, agree with how they lord over and abuse others here and elsewhere with their condescending "expertise" acid flame jobs. Seems like many of these "Tech Advisors" are auto renewed for life...
For me same website issues, lost password, and bad attitudes with interaction were bad. Larry Kummer was no better interacting regarding password issues, etc. IMO. I was one who called him and identified an past POCI renewal issue that he treated me like I was an idiot until I insisted he go step-by-step with me while on the phone, he on his computer and me on mine; and whatta you know: "Database Error!" So, who was the renewal customer idiot?
I remember past constant POCI "brainwashing" editorials such as to how great Aztec was and "if I cared about Pontiac I should run out and buy one!" and "GMC inclusion is best thing for POCI to thrive" mantra. How'd those work out?
PY provides all of the tech, friendship and support avenues free of charge. Don't like me or others here? Place on ignore.