I think Phil Brennion's post here re The AAW on line survey indicates his acknowledgement of an important relationship between internet woodturning groups and AAW. Many here belong to both. Instead of AAW you could insert that worshipful guild across the pond or any other, though perhaps less pious, turning association. The need for an internet survey got me to musing about growth of such organizations. I thought about the parallel of the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) to which I belonged for many years. Consider your own special interests, there are plenty to go around. Please remember that I'm musing from my armchair on a Sunday afternoon while waiting for the football game to begin. I'm not criticizing or suggesting a better way, nor am I deploring or celebrating growth of organizations.
In the beginning people with a common interest find one another and gradually become loosely organized and share information, but mostly socialize. As the 'Robert's Rules of Order' types do their thing, trustees & officers arise. A sporadic mimeographed newsletter ensues and if the endeavors that provoked the mutual interest increase in importance, the group prospers. Just as a moderately successful business cannot remain static the group must grow or it withers. It grows and the inevitable cycle begins. The newsletter becomes a house organ, then a journal. Funds are needed to support a better and slicker publication as expenses of an initially lean supporting cast and properties increase. Dues are collected, ads sold and paraphernalia huckstered. Often "Official Stamps of Approval or Compliance" are 'suggested' to merchants to assure quality equipment for members to buy. Subsets of interest divide and multiply. At first separate sections of the 'Journal' (QST for radio buffs) serve them but finally they break away into separate publications. From speciality pamphlets follow books devoted to a single topic followed by magazines devoted to specific sub-groups and experts who know more and more (maybe about less and less) proliferate. The original loosely knit jolly group has morphed into a large serious amorphous 'business' whose membership barely recognize one another. The organization is now a large full fledged publishing house with a flashy magazine included to justify dues. Annual meetings with trade shows and entrance fees help pick up the tab and ward off outgrowing the blood supply, _ but local clubs are the life blood. All the new members are not only joyfully welcomed; they are a necessity. The fewer and fewer generalists and traditionalists take potshots at the specialists and progressives. The splintered factions react and there's little effort to appreciate diversity and trends. Positions harden and the happy enthusiasm of yesterday become today's tiresome issues, debated 'ad nauseam'.
I am not disgruntled and I don't think that a healthy and growing AAW is a paradigm for my lugubrious musings. It may never be, but there cannot be any answers if there aren't any questions, and questions do not arise without wondering. I applaud the AAW survey and thank Phil for inviting RCW to join in. FWIW, Arch
Fortiter,