Re: Review of DASC membership fees

Hi Peter.

Sorry I missed the meeting, but I was otherwise occupied.
Also, you didn't send any dialup info, or a dialup
reminder. I'm cc'ing the DASC reflector, to make up for no
discussion at the SC meeting.

-- 
                          John
                      jwill@AstraGate.net
                      John Michael Williams
Peter Ashenden wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> The DASC Steering Committee reviewed the membership fees at its meeting on
> 12 November (see http://www.dasc.org/meetings/2004-11/.).  This message is
> to ask you to review the recommendation and vote to approve the revised fee.
> There are two recommendations to review (see below).  Would you please reply
> to me by email with your vote on each one.  Since a 50% return is required,
> would you please vote even if only to abstain.
> 
> The DASC-SC arrived at its recommendation by reviewing its operating
> expenses and other potential sources of revenue.  Currently, the IEEE
> Computer Society funds our operating deficit to a reasonable amount.  The
> DASC-SC considers this to be a revenue contribution.  The DASC-SC will also
> seek contributions from other sources, including IEEE-SA and external bodies
> with an interest in DASC activities.  The recommended membership fees seek
> to match these contributions.
> 
> Would DASC members please vote on the following:
> 
> 1. That the fee for individual members be $US100 from 2005 onwards.
> 
>     ____  Affirmative (comments optional)
> 
>     ____  Negative (no comment)
> 
>     __X__  Negative (with comments...)
I will not renew my DASC membership at this high rate.
I pay as much to all of IEEE for their dues, and I
get almost nothing in return.  Why should I expect
DASC to do any better?
DASC membership for individuals should be around
$10 - $30, in my opinion.
> 
>     ____  Abstain
> 
>     Comments: ...
> 
> 2. That:
>    - DASC entity membership be extended to IEEE-SA Corporate members, and
>    - entities be allowed DASC membership at the same fee structure used
>      for IEEE-SA corporate membership and with a number of DASC individual
>      memberships equal to the number of SA individual memberships granted
>      to SA corporate members
>      (see http://standards.ieee.org/sa-mem/corporate.html), and
>    - the DASC request IEEE-SA to mutually extend membership to DASC entity
>      members.
> 
>     ____  Affirmative (comments optional)
> 
>     ____  Negative (no comment)
> 
>     __X__  Negative (with comments...)
The DASC should not include any corporate input, other
that that of individual members.  IEEE is an engineering
organization, not a corporate platform.  Corporations should
be representated in EDAC and similar organizations.  Perhaps
Accellera, but not an engineering organization.
If the DASC officers would try to spend less money on
unnecessary travel, there would not be any motivation
for trying to get corporations to support it.
> 
>     ____  Abstain
> 
>     Comments: ...
> 
> Thanks, and regards,
> 
> Peter Ashenden
> DASC Chair
> 
> --
> Dr. Peter J. Ashenden                        peter@ashenden.com.au
> Ashenden Designs Pty. Ltd.                   www.ashenden.com.au
> PO Box 640                                   Ph:  +61 8 8339 7532
> Stirling, SA 5152                            Fax: +61 8 8339 2616
> Australia                                    Mobile: +61 414 70 9106
> 
>