(j3.2006) Looking for feedback on INCITS fee structure proposals

[Dan Nagle]

Hi,

In response to this:

> From: Jeran, Paul [mailto:paul.jeran at hp.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 9:30 AM
> To: Thomas Plum; fernando.podio at nist.gov; Donald Deutsch (donald.deutsch at oracle.com)
> Cc: Garner, Jennifer
> Subject: Looking for feedback on INCITS fee structure proposals
>  
> Dear Chairs,
>  
> The INCITS finance committee is investigating new 2015 fee structures to improve the ability for INCITS to react to changes in our expenses during the year and to react to standards opportunities.  We are looking at across the board increases as well as increases that are the result of gaining additional value for members.
>  
> From the latter investigation, increasing the fees on the TC and TGs where the US holds the corresponding SC and SWG Secretariat is one proposal under consideration.   In all cases having a US member hold positions of leadership allows the US members to have a more direct role in the management of the international committee.  At the same time, in some cases this advantage comes with a significant cost to INCITS to maintain the leadership roles.  The feeling of the FBC is that advantage to the members and cost to INCITS should be captured in some additional cost to the members receiving the benefit.
>  
> As chairs of the US mirror committees in these areas (US TAGs to SC 22, SC 32 and SC 37), I would be interested in your thoughts about the relative value to the US members by holding the Secretariat and what you think would be a fair increase in membership dues based upon this value.  We are not looking to fully fund the secretariats from additional dues, but would like to offset some of the costs.
>  
> Please let me know your thoughts on this proposal  by June 25th so I can roll it into an overall finance proposal for FY2015 at the June 30 - July 1, 2014 meeting of the INCITS Executive Board.
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> Paul Jeran

I sent this:

> A further rues increase would hurt PL22.3.  I don?t have
> a definitive measure of how much, but my estimate is in the range
> of several memberships.  Over the last few years, several conversations
> with prospective new members have ended in complete silence only when
> the membership fee is mentioned.  Time or travel to meetings was never
> an obstacle.
> 
> Tom is correct that small firms and individuals are hurt the worst.
> Also small departments in larger organizations are hurt.
> 
> The membership fee >>> IS NOT <<< comparable to travel costs.
> The expression of delusions to the contrary is frustrating to hear.
> Most individuals and organizations have >>> separate <<< budgets
> for travel.  NSF grants, for example, typically have travel allotments.
> They have no category for standards organizations fees.  It?s
> out-of-pocket or no go.
> 
> Programming languages are undergoing one revolution after another.
> In recent decades, new technologies include object-oriented programming,
> parallel programming, testing and contractual design.  These ideas
> have appeared in standards only during that time.  The ideas supporting
> these revolutions come from small firms and individuals.  Large
> firms have a greater interest in stability.  Thus, continuing US technological
> leadership rests, to an great degree, on enlisting small firms and
> individuals, who are the source of much of these new directions.
> 
> Yet another membership fee hike will result in yet another round
> of questioning why a membership in programming language standards
> committees should be continued at all.  After all, if you want
> a new feature, why not simply put it in GCC and be happy.
> 
> Next week I?ll  attend the International meeting, joint between PL22.3
> and WG5.  The UK Fortran Interest group pays 95 UKP per year
> in membership fees.  The Canadian, Netherlands and German delegates do not pay
> personal membership fees.  Many Japanese delegates are paid to be members
> of the standards organization (for translating standards into Japanese).
> Membership in IEEE/SA is about $250/year if not a member of IEEE
> or IEEE/CS, and about $75/year is already a member of IEEE.  Is
> INCITS really the only NB in the world that can?t function without bleeding
> the volunteers who write the standards?

Thank goodness I sent it before I calmed myself.

--

Cheers!
Dan Nagle