jnguyen4007 February 6, 2009 Share February 6, 2009 Everyone, Click on the banner sponsored by Doctors Foster & Smith on top and vote for your favorite site, WAMAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar Magnolia February 6, 2009 Share February 6, 2009 Voted. I think you can vote daily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbartco February 6, 2009 Share February 6, 2009 vote early, vote often. More visability=more goodies for you guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterTang February 6, 2009 Share February 6, 2009 vote early, vote often. More visability=more goodies for you guys Eh? Like what? What's the incentive here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbartco February 6, 2009 Share February 6, 2009 Incentive? When we are out begging for raffles etc... They want to give to large clubs with high visibility #s for them, and ones that visit their site. Plus it is just cool to have wamas recognized as a useful resource for reefers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davelin315 February 6, 2009 Share February 6, 2009 I voted for the first time yesterday. And the second. And the third. And the fourth. And the fifth... you can vote as often as you wish, no limit on how many times you can vote per day. Remember, this goes through the end of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Origami February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 I emailed their customer service department the other day asking them the following: "What is your "Fins Up" program and how does it benefit the nominated organization (if it even does)?" They responded today as follows: "When the banner is placed on your website, it is a nice validation for others visiting your site that it has been nominated as a good resource by Drs. Foster and Smith, as many people in the hobby feel that we are a reliable source of information." Maybe it's a canned answer, but if accurate, it seems like we're simply providing free advertising for Drs. Foster & Smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbartco February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Maybe it's a canned answer, but if accurate, it seems like we're simply providing free advertising for Drs. Foster & Smith. getting changed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Origami February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 I'm going to take my last post one step further and ask that the officers consider the following carefully, and perhaps to reconsider this Drs. Foster & Smith banner idea. 1) The Drs. Foster and Smith banner is automatically presented on every WAMAS page. 2) There are untested but promised benefits to having the banner exposed to the membership. (Promised by Drs. Foster and Smith, of course) 3) What exactly these promises gain the membership is completely unclear. 4) Further, these "promises" are only realized if a member clicks through the banner to Drs. Foster & Smiths' website to "vote." These votes, of course, put the member just one click away from their retail website and also adds to their visitor count. It is very clear from this alone that Drs. Foster & Smith benefit from this exposure. 5) Not only do we place the banner on every WAMAS page, we put it right next to our sponsoring vendor's banner. 6) Our sponsors pay for these banners, which not only shows their personal and active support of our club, but also provides them exposure that presumably is good for their business. 7) Our sponsors pay good money, and in these tough times perhaps even hard earned money, for this benefit. And, finally, 8) Our paying sponsors' banners only fly on randomly selected pages while Drs. Foster & Smith, a non-paying beneficiary, get their banner flown on every page. Consequently, our paying sponsors must timeshare their benefit (which they pay for) with other sponsors, while Drs. Foster & Smith get full access to the banner space. I, therefore, submit for consideration that we have inadvertently created a "super-premium" class of sponsorship in providing preferred access to our membership. And, that we have done so without appropriate and measurable compensation or benefit. I would ask you to consider that perhaps we have fallen victim to a rather clever marketing ploy that not only provides Drs. Foster and Smith with free exposure and easy click-thru access to their retail website, but also are providing Drs. Foster and Smith added credibility in the hobby as a resource capable of judging the ranking club website resources. (Note, for example, that RC has not signed on to this, nor has RS, though both are very popular web resources available to the hobbyist.) Further, I would argue that we, in the process of creating this higher level of sponsorship, have subordinated the class of sponsorship that our regular class of sponsors have obtained through a payment of fees. And, in providing this preferred class benefit without appropriately scaled compensation, have undermined the spirit and value of club sponsorship. Summarizing, I think that we have done ourselves a disservice, and our vendors a different disservice by taking on the Drs. Foster and Smith banner, and ask that it be removed unless some tangible and superior benefit can be described that justifies the superior treatment, access and exposure that Drs. Foster and Smith are receiving in excess of that which we are providing our paying sponsors. I'm not a rabble-rouser but think there is a real question of fairness here to be thoughtfully considered. Additional thoughts and contrary opinions are invited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AQUACO February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Well Said! I'm going to take my last post one step further and ask that the officers consider the following carefully, and perhaps to reconsider this Drs. Foster & Smith banner idea. 1) The Drs. Foster and Smith banner is automatically presented on every WAMAS page. 2) There are untested but promised benefits to having the banner exposed to the membership. (Promised by Drs. Foster and Smith, of course) 3) What exactly these promises gain the membership is completely unclear. 4) Further, these "promises" are only realized if a member clicks through the banner to Drs. Foster & Smiths' website to "vote." These votes, of course, put the member just one click away from their retail website and also adds to their visitor count. It is very clear from this alone that Drs. Foster & Smith benefit from this exposure. 5) Not only do we place the banner on every WAMAS page, we put it right next to our sponsoring vendor's banner. 6) Our sponsors pay for these banners, which not only shows their personal and active support of our club, but also provides them exposure that presumably is good for their business. 7) Our sponsors pay good money, and in these tough times perhaps even hard earned money, for this benefit. And, finally, 8) Our paying sponsors' banners only fly on randomly selected pages while Drs. Foster & Smith, a non-paying beneficiary, get their banner flown on every page. Consequently, our paying sponsors must timeshare their benefit (which they pay for) with other sponsors, while Drs. Foster & Smith get full access to the banner space. I, therefore, submit for consideration that we have inadvertently created a "super-premium" class of sponsorship in providing preferred access to our membership. And, that we have done so without appropriate and measurable compensation or benefit. I would ask you to consider that perhaps we have fallen victim to a rather clever marketing ploy that not only provides Drs. Foster and Smith with free exposure and easy click-thru access to their retail website, but also are providing Drs. Foster and Smith added credibility in the hobby as a resource capable of judging the ranking club website resources. (Note, for example, that RC has not signed on to this, nor has RS, though both are very popular web resources available to the hobbyist.) Further, I would argue that we, in the process of creating this higher level of sponsorship, have subordinated the class of sponsorship that our regular class of sponsors have obtained through a payment of fees. And, in providing this preferred class benefit without appropriately scaled compensation, have undermined the spirit and value of club sponsorship. Summarizing, I think that we have done ourselves a disservice, and our vendors a different disservice by taking on the Drs. Foster and Smith banner, and ask that it be removed unless some tangible and superior benefit can be described that justifies the superior treatment, access and exposure that Drs. Foster and Smith are receiving in excess of that which we are providing our paying sponsors. I'm not a rabble-rouser but think there is a real question of fairness here to be thoughtfully considered. Additional thoughts and contrary opinions are invited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flowerseller February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Fins down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbartco February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Tom, Trust me, I have been brow beaten by complaints from our vendors to the point of hardly wanting to continue as an officer. We realized that this was wasn't the best way to do this and have asked the vendors to allow our webmaster to get this change taken care of and submitted to adhere to the guidelines of our "vendor terms of service". DFS have contributed to the club enough to meet the requirements of a premium sponsor. We will work to make this work for the best benefit for the club. We would hope that the one week this has been up will not drive our vendors out of business. We hope you guys can understand as well. You have my cell, you are welcome to call and discuss as well. It is being corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterTang February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 I, therefore, submit for consideration that we have inadvertently created a "super-premium" class of sponsorship in providing preferred access to our membership. And, that we have done so without appropriate and measurable compensation or benefit. This is exactly what I was getting at. Thanks for articulating it so well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterTang February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Tom, Trust me, I have been brow beaten by complaints from our vendors to the point of hardly wanting to continue as an officer. Sorry, pal. You got nominated again. Do your time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Origami February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 (edited) Tom, Trust me, I have been brow beaten by complaints from our vendors to the point of hardly wanting to continue as an officer. We realized that this was wasn't the best way to do this and have asked the vendors to allow our webmaster to get this change taken care of and submitted to adhere to the guidelines of our "vendor terms of service". DFS have contributed to the club enough to meet the requirements of a premium sponsor. We will work to make this work for the best benefit for the club. We would hope that the one week this has been up will not drive our vendors out of business. We hope you guys can understand as well. You have my cell, you are welcome to call and discuss as well. It is being corrected. Not to brow beat you, Doug, or anybody else for that matter. Also, I wasn't sure what "It is being corrected" referred to. When you originally posted that comment (or, "getting changed" as it were), I took it as meaning that DFS was changing their "stock response," not that we were taking some action. Sorry, pal. You got nominated again. Do your time! That's my first laugh of the day. Thanks, Mr. Tang! Hey, Doug, looks like you asked for it! Edited February 10, 2009 by Origami2547 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dschflier February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Very well said Tom. I completely agree. I didn't even notice it but do hope it is removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davelin315 February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Guys, Doug is right, everyone needs to simmer down and take it easy. We viewed this as an opportunity for the club to gain notoriety and publicity, but it's obvious that not all people feel the same way. Not that this thread is hostile at all, but we're looking at what we did and the feedback that we got. Doug has already stated that we're working on a solution and we are trying to find one that will benefit everyone as we always do. As was stated, F&S has donated enough in the past year to easily qualify as a premium sponsor but the point of the button was not to advertise them as a sponsor but to promote the club. Doug is right, he did receive an awful lot of grief over this, as did all of us, something that I feel is unwarranted as far as the nature of some of the comments that were made about what we are doing and how we treat our members, both vendors and regular. Again, not that this post is hostile, but please consider that we are also people and we work long hours to ensure that the club is the best it can be. Think about the fact that one of the largest national retailers even bothered to reach out to us and nominate us for this award and you'll see just how much your officers and volunteers have done for you over the years. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but please remember that we are working on your behalf and in what we believe to be your best interests, whether you agree or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wdytat February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Should I remove the Education Links page too? j/k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Origami February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 (edited) Guys, Doug is right, everyone needs to simmer down and take it easy. We viewed this as an opportunity for the club to gain notoriety and publicity, but it's obvious that not all people feel the same way. Not that this thread is hostile at all, but we're looking at what we did and the feedback that we got. Doug has already stated that we're working on a solution and we are trying to find one that will benefit everyone as we always do. As was stated, F&S has donated enough in the past year to easily qualify as a premium sponsor but the point of the button was not to advertise them as a sponsor but to promote the club. Doug is right, he did receive an awful lot of grief over this, as did all of us, something that I feel is unwarranted as far as the nature of some of the comments that were made about what we are doing and how we treat our members, both vendors and regular. Again, not that this post is hostile, but please consider that we are also people and we work long hours to ensure that the club is the best it can be. Think about the fact that one of the largest national retailers even bothered to reach out to us and nominate us for this award and you'll see just how much your officers and volunteers have done for you over the years. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but please remember that we are working on your behalf and in what we believe to be your best interests, whether you agree or not. Agreed. I want to be clear, my thoughts were not aimed at raising the rabble, nor were they intended as a criticism of Doug or anybody on the executive committee. I've seen enough of these people to know that they're good people giving their time and knowledge to our shared passion. I, for one, sincerely appreciate that effort. Sometimes, however, we don't see the potholes in the road ahead as we move forward and sometimes we run headlong into one despite our best intentions to steer a smooth course. I think that this may be one of those times. I appreciate the opportunity to engage in a productive, civil, and forthright dialogue aimed at moving us forward together. It is, in my opinion, far more beneficial to move forward in this fashion than to engage in divide and conquer strategies. Thank you for taking the time to reconsider thoughtfully the whole DFS banner thing. I think that it benefits us all to know that we can raise potentially touchy issues and know that we have a board that will listen to our concerns. {edited for a grammar screw up} Edited February 10, 2009 by Origami2547 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnybv February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 If they have donated the appropriate amount give them a banner in rotation with the rest of the "Premium Sponsors" and be done with it. Tom I greatly appreciate your words, and you are 100% on the mark! John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveS February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Agreed that it's great to see we can have disagreement without it becoming one of "those" threads. Dave Lin's point about grief factor is a very good one. Everyone should remember that WAMAS has LOTS of members. If every time a problem occurred only 1/4 the members made a complaint, that would still equate to hundreds of complaints. We may seem like a small-ish community because 80% of the posts are probably made by 20% of the people. But there are still lots of people who don't post publicly. Those people probably voice their opinions in a more private manner to the officers. We should keep that in mind when problems come up. This isn't to say you shouldn't voice your opinion if there is a problem. It's just that the last thing Doug and others need is more people complaining to them about a problem they already know about and are working to fix. Let's try to avoid piling on when there is a problem and exercise patience to allow the officers to process the information. This isn't directed at people on this thread but as a general observation. Basically we should just remember that "me too"s are great for Group Buys but not so great for complaints... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaironman February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Agreed. I want to be clear, my thoughts were not aimed at raising the rabble, nor were they intended as a criticism of Doug or anybody on the executive committee. I've seen enough of these people to know that they're good people giving their time and knowledge to our shared passion. I, for one, sincerely appreciate that effort. Sometimes, however, we don't see the potholes in the road ahead as we move forward and sometimes we run headlong into one despite our best intentions to steer a smooth course. I think that this may be one of those times. I appreciate the opportunity to engage in a productive, civil, and forthright dialogue aimed at moving us forward together. It is, in my opinion, far more beneficial to move forward in this fashion than to engage in divide and conquer strategies. Thank you for taking the time to reconsider thoughtfully the whole DFS banner thing. I think that it benefits us all to know that we are raise potentially touchy issues and know that we have a board that will listen to our concerns. Doug and Dave Lin: We appreciate your volunteer work. Also, Thank you Tom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davelin315 February 10, 2009 Share February 10, 2009 Doug and Dave Lin: We appreciate your volunteer work. Also, Thank you Tom. Don't single us out for appreciation, Doug does far more than I do, as do some of the other officers and non-officer volunteers. Tom, your point is well taken, and again, I wasn't trying to quibble with what you raised as a point, merely trying to remind people that we are doing our best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts