Date   
LEARN - CODE - BUILD

Antony Watts
 

Just noticed my previous posting on this project had a mistake in the email address. The correct one is antonywatts@...

Re: RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Allan Gallop
 

Some good points made by all in this thread, I'd like to add to virtual-clubs discussion as I got a lot of feedback to my letter published in Radcom some time ago and the work done by MX0MXO

By virtual-clubs it really has two meanings:
1. Existing clubs expanding out thier online presence to augment beyond just 'club night' and promote community and discussion. lots of clubs are already doing this with websites and social media but I think more is possible such as live streaming meetings / events / training, more nets etc and more of what could be considered hub ideology, wherein non-regular members can still be included in activities and the club. In my original arguments I laid out that by doing such 'virtual' things clubs should be able to co-opt content and activities, something we played with at Mx0 was teleconferencing talks to other clubs and virtual members

2. Purely virtual clubs, aka region 9000 (R9K), these could be social media groups or entities like Mx0mxo which hold no geographic preference and operate only online / on-air. most notably is speciality groups like qrp/disabled-hams/homebrew groups.

I think the virtual element is not well known / detailed, but as someone who has an illness that keeps me from attending club alot I do feel excluded sometimes, simple things like the online buildathon and digimode night went along way

If you look at the maker movement these points will be very familiar as this is how they operate currently, rather than defining walls, groups take every advantage available to them and work with each other. IMHO we should be working together and with non-radio groups such as hackerspaces / makers  / PiJams too as so many interests are shared, and getting more online content out there between us will only help. There is so much freely available technology to do this it's foolish not to use it

apologies for the rant, it's just a vision I have been trying to push for a long time

Re: RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

RONALD WHITE
 

Richard
I was not against it local clubs work together but I was trying to say was if we get rid of all the clubs as it said virtual clubs are a way to go we need a mixture of both all working g and linking together to act as one for the good of the hobby .I just did not explain myself clearly. 

Ron



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
From: RICHARD THOMAS <r.p.thomas@...>
Date: 14/10/2019 12:57 (GMT+00:00)
To: main@hamclubs.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Ham Clubs] RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Ronald, thanks for this.  One of the most difficult misunderstandings to counter about hub thinking has been that it proposes the closure or change of successful clubs.  In fact, it's the exact opposite. 

Successful clubs are the life-blood of Amateur Radio.  Hub thinking simply celebrates that success, and wants more people to be part of it. With a rapidly declining population of licensed Amateurs, in the next few years we will see a massive decline in the number of smaller clubs.  Larger successful clubs will continue, and consequently grow in importance.  And wider access to them will be by web connectivity - just as Essex Ham is demonstrating.

Hub thinking means that instead of being 'closed to non-members', or 'only open if you join the club and pay an annual subscription', these clubs could join with others to become resource hubs, providing teaching, training, expertise, hands-on operating with a fully operational station, etc. They could also associate with other organisations that use radio as part of their hobby - drones, app creation, radio astronomers, and so on.  They then become centres of shared expertise, experiment, and enthusiasm with radio as a core element.

A second myth is that hub thinking will deplete resources.  It's not true. If these encounters are monetised in even a small way, revenue is likely to grow.  For example, 15 people paying a £20 a year subscription = £300 a year.  300 visits from a wider individual pool paying £2 an encounter = £600 a year. Clubs that think and behave like hubs are likely to be even more successful.

It's easy to feel threatened by new thinking.  But stop and listen carefully;  it may be that you're dismissing something important.

Best
Richard


From: main@hamclubs.groups.io <main@hamclubs.groups.io> on behalf of RONALD WHITE via Groups.Io <ronald_white444@...>
Sent: 14 October 2019 12:35
To: main@hamclubs.groups.io <main@hamclubs.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Ham Clubs] RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club
 
Only problem I can see if we all go virtual clubs with no clubs as they are now then any practical teaching needed or even people wishing to learn new aspects will have not a lot of places field days are good but not if weather is inclement  so clubs as they are do have a place.lights blue touch paper stands back with tin hat on 😊



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
From: Pete M0PSX <group@...>
Date: 14/10/2019 00:22 (GMT+00:00)
To: main@hamclubs.groups.io
Subject: [Ham Clubs] RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Hi all,

I wonder if anyone here attended the RSGB Convention this week, and in particular, the last session of the day, about clubs?

For those who didn't, here is an extract from my RSGB Convention 2019 Report


Probably the highlight of my weekend. Run by the ICQ Podcast team, this was a panel of two ICQ presenters, two RSGB Board members (Ian Shepherd and Kamal Singh), plus Richard G4JJP (author of a controversial article in the June 2019 Radcom suggesting a change to club structures)

ICQ Podcast’s “Gow, Merge or Disband your Club” session

To be honest, I’m still digesting the contents of this talk and reviewing four pages of copious notes taken. There’s a lot to be said about this session – far too much for this summary. A few of the points I underlined:

  • “Hubs not clubs”
  • “Club baggage”
  • “Hub” vs “Virtual clubs”
  • “Should the RSGB be a hub?”
  • To Google: “Disintermediation”, “centre set” “closed set” (bounded set?)
  • A mention for the “Brickworks” scheme (that didn’t launch at the Convention)
  • Some RSGB regional teams issue a “regional newsletter”
  • Top-down vs Bottom-up approach
  • Some interesting thoughts on youth access to amateur radio
  • Clear divisions between single stand-alone clubs, and those acting as “hubs” to a greater or lesser extent

It was great that the efforts of Essex Ham members was acknowledged, and it was very rewarding that both Richard and the ICQ team highlighted Essex Ham as positive examples of the hub model. Positive mentions too for CambHams and Suffolk RED. RSGB also acknowledged that virtual clubs are “starting to appear”

Any thoughts?

Pete M0PSX

Re: RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Antony Watts
 

Banbury Amateur Radio Society (BARS) is working to help with our ZEST program. See GanymedeHam.blogspot.com fo rmy activity there.

My feelig is that the RSGB MUSt be a centre for bringing club activities together. We shoul devote at least 2/3 of RadCom to this. What happening, links to club sites, actual tech articles.

Need to create a way for RSGB tohost software downloads.


Antony
M0IFA

On 14 Oct 2019, at 00:22, Pete M0PSX <@essexham> wrote:

Hi all,

I wonder if anyone here attended the RSGB Convention this week, and in particular, the last session of the day, about clubs?

For those who didn't, here is an extract from my RSGB Convention 2019 Report


Probably the highlight of my weekend. Run by the ICQ Podcast team, this was a panel of two ICQ presenters, two RSGB Board members (Ian Shepherd and Kamal Singh), plus Richard G4JJP (author of a controversial article in the June 2019 Radcom suggesting a change to club structures)

ICQ Podcast’s “Gow, Merge or Disband your Club” session
To be honest, I’m still digesting the contents of this talk and reviewing four pages of copious notes taken. There’s a lot to be said about this session – far too much for this summary. A few of the points I underlined:

• “Hubs not clubs”
• “Club baggage”
• “Hub” vs “Virtual clubs”
• “Should the RSGB be a hub?”
• To Google: “Disintermediation”, “centre set” “closed set” (bounded set?)
• A mention for the “Brickworks” scheme (that didn’t launch at the Convention)
• Some RSGB regional teams issue a “regional newsletter”
• Top-down vs Bottom-up approach
• Some interesting thoughts on youth access to amateur radio
• Clear divisions between single stand-alone clubs, and those acting as “hubs” to a greater or lesser extent
It was great that the efforts of Essex Ham members was acknowledged, and it was very rewarding that both Richard and the ICQ team highlighted Essex Ham as positive examples of the hub model. Positive mentions too for CambHams and Suffolk RED. RSGB also acknowledged that virtual clubs are “starting to appear”

Any thoughts?

Pete M0PSX

Re: RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

RICHARD THOMAS
 

Ronald, thanks for this.  One of the most difficult misunderstandings to counter about hub thinking has been that it proposes the closure or change of successful clubs.  In fact, it's the exact opposite. 

Successful clubs are the life-blood of Amateur Radio.  Hub thinking simply celebrates that success, and wants more people to be part of it. With a rapidly declining population of licensed Amateurs, in the next few years we will see a massive decline in the number of smaller clubs.  Larger successful clubs will continue, and consequently grow in importance.  And wider access to them will be by web connectivity - just as Essex Ham is demonstrating.

Hub thinking means that instead of being 'closed to non-members', or 'only open if you join the club and pay an annual subscription', these clubs could join with others to become resource hubs, providing teaching, training, expertise, hands-on operating with a fully operational station, etc. They could also associate with other organisations that use radio as part of their hobby - drones, app creation, radio astronomers, and so on.  They then become centres of shared expertise, experiment, and enthusiasm with radio as a core element.

A second myth is that hub thinking will deplete resources.  It's not true. If these encounters are monetised in even a small way, revenue is likely to grow.  For example, 15 people paying a £20 a year subscription = £300 a year.  300 visits from a wider individual pool paying £2 an encounter = £600 a year. Clubs that think and behave like hubs are likely to be even more successful.

It's easy to feel threatened by new thinking.  But stop and listen carefully;  it may be that you're dismissing something important.

Best
Richard


From: main@hamclubs.groups.io <main@hamclubs.groups.io> on behalf of RONALD WHITE via Groups.Io <ronald_white444@...>
Sent: 14 October 2019 12:35
To: main@hamclubs.groups.io <main@hamclubs.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Ham Clubs] RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club
 
Only problem I can see if we all go virtual clubs with no clubs as they are now then any practical teaching needed or even people wishing to learn new aspects will have not a lot of places field days are good but not if weather is inclement  so clubs as they are do have a place.lights blue touch paper stands back with tin hat on 😊



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
From: Pete M0PSX <group@...>
Date: 14/10/2019 00:22 (GMT+00:00)
To: main@hamclubs.groups.io
Subject: [Ham Clubs] RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Hi all,

I wonder if anyone here attended the RSGB Convention this week, and in particular, the last session of the day, about clubs?

For those who didn't, here is an extract from my RSGB Convention 2019 Report


Probably the highlight of my weekend. Run by the ICQ Podcast team, this was a panel of two ICQ presenters, two RSGB Board members (Ian Shepherd and Kamal Singh), plus Richard G4JJP (author of a controversial article in the June 2019 Radcom suggesting a change to club structures)

ICQ Podcast’s “Gow, Merge or Disband your Club” session

To be honest, I’m still digesting the contents of this talk and reviewing four pages of copious notes taken. There’s a lot to be said about this session – far too much for this summary. A few of the points I underlined:

  • “Hubs not clubs”
  • “Club baggage”
  • “Hub” vs “Virtual clubs”
  • “Should the RSGB be a hub?”
  • To Google: “Disintermediation”, “centre set” “closed set” (bounded set?)
  • A mention for the “Brickworks” scheme (that didn’t launch at the Convention)
  • Some RSGB regional teams issue a “regional newsletter”
  • Top-down vs Bottom-up approach
  • Some interesting thoughts on youth access to amateur radio
  • Clear divisions between single stand-alone clubs, and those acting as “hubs” to a greater or lesser extent

It was great that the efforts of Essex Ham members was acknowledged, and it was very rewarding that both Richard and the ICQ team highlighted Essex Ham as positive examples of the hub model. Positive mentions too for CambHams and Suffolk RED. RSGB also acknowledged that virtual clubs are “starting to appear”

Any thoughts?

Pete M0PSX

Re: RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Pete M0PSX
 

Valid points, and these were discussed:

Training - Less that 40% of clubs offer training, and many of those that do, only do something once or twice a year. There's been talk of a simpler entry-level licence and online training & exams

Learning new skills - Some prefer watching YouTube than waiting a year for their local club to offer a talk on something.

Weather - If weather is inclemant, travelling to clubs may not be practical - so online / video works well. clun attendance often falls in winter months

Important to say that this is not all about virtual clubs - it's about being smarter. If a club is working well, everyone's happy and membership is growing - great. If not, working with a neighbouring club, or becoming part of a network, mnay not be a bad thing. For example, in Essex and Suffolk there have been very successful multi-club events - in some cases, where a club doesn;t have skills in a certain area, a neighbouring club might.

Pete

Re: RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Antony Watts
 

Check out my latest blog post at GanymedeHam.blogspot.com on this subject. In Banbury we did something about it, we call it club ZEST.

On 14 Oct 2019, at 12:35, RONALD WHITE via Groups.Io <ronald_white444=btinternet.com@groups.io> wrote:

Only problem I can see if we all go virtual clubs with no clubs as they are now then any practical teaching needed or even people wishing to learn new aspects will have not a lot of places field days are good but not if weather is inclement so clubs as they are do have a place.lights blue touch paper stands back with tin hat on 😊



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
From: Pete M0PSX <@essexham>
Date: 14/10/2019 00:22 (GMT+00:00)
To: main@hamclubs.groups.io
Subject: [Ham Clubs] RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Hi all,

I wonder if anyone here attended the RSGB Convention this week, and in particular, the last session of the day, about clubs?

For those who didn't, here is an extract from my RSGB Convention 2019 Report


Probably the highlight of my weekend. Run by the ICQ Podcast team, this was a panel of two ICQ presenters, two RSGB Board members (Ian Shepherd and Kamal Singh), plus Richard G4JJP (author of a controversial article in the June 2019 Radcom suggesting a change to club structures)

ICQ Podcast’s “Gow, Merge or Disband your Club” session
To be honest, I’m still digesting the contents of this talk and reviewing four pages of copious notes taken. There’s a lot to be said about this session – far too much for this summary. A few of the points I underlined:

• “Hubs not clubs”
• “Club baggage”
• “Hub” vs “Virtual clubs”
• “Should the RSGB be a hub?”
• To Google: “Disintermediation”, “centre set” “closed set” (bounded set?)
• A mention for the “Brickworks” scheme (that didn’t launch at the Convention)
• Some RSGB regional teams issue a “regional newsletter”
• Top-down vs Bottom-up approach
• Some interesting thoughts on youth access to amateur radio
• Clear divisions between single stand-alone clubs, and those acting as “hubs” to a greater or lesser extent
It was great that the efforts of Essex Ham members was acknowledged, and it was very rewarding that both Richard and the ICQ team highlighted Essex Ham as positive examples of the hub model. Positive mentions too for CambHams and Suffolk RED. RSGB also acknowledged that virtual clubs are “starting to appear”

Any thoughts?

Pete M0PSX

Re: RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

RONALD WHITE
 

Only problem I can see if we all go virtual clubs with no clubs as they are now then any practical teaching needed or even people wishing to learn new aspects will have not a lot of places field days are good but not if weather is inclement  so clubs as they are do have a place.lights blue touch paper stands back with tin hat on 😊



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
From: Pete M0PSX <group@...>
Date: 14/10/2019 00:22 (GMT+00:00)
To: main@hamclubs.groups.io
Subject: [Ham Clubs] RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Hi all,

I wonder if anyone here attended the RSGB Convention this week, and in particular, the last session of the day, about clubs?

For those who didn't, here is an extract from my RSGB Convention 2019 Report


Probably the highlight of my weekend. Run by the ICQ Podcast team, this was a panel of two ICQ presenters, two RSGB Board members (Ian Shepherd and Kamal Singh), plus Richard G4JJP (author of a controversial article in the June 2019 Radcom suggesting a change to club structures)

ICQ Podcast’s “Gow, Merge or Disband your Club” session

To be honest, I’m still digesting the contents of this talk and reviewing four pages of copious notes taken. There’s a lot to be said about this session – far too much for this summary. A few of the points I underlined:

  • “Hubs not clubs”
  • “Club baggage”
  • “Hub” vs “Virtual clubs”
  • “Should the RSGB be a hub?”
  • To Google: “Disintermediation”, “centre set” “closed set” (bounded set?)
  • A mention for the “Brickworks” scheme (that didn’t launch at the Convention)
  • Some RSGB regional teams issue a “regional newsletter”
  • Top-down vs Bottom-up approach
  • Some interesting thoughts on youth access to amateur radio
  • Clear divisions between single stand-alone clubs, and those acting as “hubs” to a greater or lesser extent

It was great that the efforts of Essex Ham members was acknowledged, and it was very rewarding that both Richard and the ICQ team highlighted Essex Ham as positive examples of the hub model. Positive mentions too for CambHams and Suffolk RED. RSGB also acknowledged that virtual clubs are “starting to appear”

Any thoughts?

Pete M0PSX

RSGB Convention - Grow, Merge or Disband Your Club

Pete M0PSX
 

Hi all,

I wonder if anyone here attended the RSGB Convention this week, and in particular, the last session of the day, about clubs?

For those who didn't, here is an extract from my RSGB Convention 2019 Report


Probably the highlight of my weekend. Run by the ICQ Podcast team, this was a panel of two ICQ presenters, two RSGB Board members (Ian Shepherd and Kamal Singh), plus Richard G4JJP (author of a controversial article in the June 2019 Radcom suggesting a change to club structures)

ICQ Podcast’s “Gow, Merge or Disband your Club” session

To be honest, I’m still digesting the contents of this talk and reviewing four pages of copious notes taken. There’s a lot to be said about this session – far too much for this summary. A few of the points I underlined:

  • “Hubs not clubs”
  • “Club baggage”
  • “Hub” vs “Virtual clubs”
  • “Should the RSGB be a hub?”
  • To Google: “Disintermediation”, “centre set” “closed set” (bounded set?)
  • A mention for the “Brickworks” scheme (that didn’t launch at the Convention)
  • Some RSGB regional teams issue a “regional newsletter”
  • Top-down vs Bottom-up approach
  • Some interesting thoughts on youth access to amateur radio
  • Clear divisions between single stand-alone clubs, and those acting as “hubs” to a greater or lesser extent

It was great that the efforts of Essex Ham members was acknowledged, and it was very rewarding that both Richard and the ICQ team highlighted Essex Ham as positive examples of the hub model. Positive mentions too for CambHams and Suffolk RED. RSGB also acknowledged that virtual clubs are “starting to appear”

Any thoughts?

Pete M0PSX

Re: Removing clubs from training and exams?

M5AKA
 

We want clubs to continue training but we also need a separate Online Only approach to cater for those areas where no suitable club-based training is available.

The past 17 years has shown us that no more than 40% of clubs are capable of running a Foundation course and not all of those clubs still run courses today. The RSGB Exam and Course Finder information is woefully out-of-date.

This means most areas in the UK don't have a local training course and some have had to travel up to 200 miles to get to a club where they can do their Practical Assessments and Exam.

It's clear we need to supplement the existing training provision with a totally Online system for the Course and Exam with No Practical Assessments. This would bring the opportunity to join our hobby to All People in the UK not just the fortunate few who live near a club that provides training.

73 Trevor M5AKA

On Thursday, 10 October 2019, 14:28:14 BST, barrie_spink via Groups.Io <gm0kzx@...> wrote:


No body would want to stop clubs doing training and in an ideal world there would be a club reasonably near to those that wanted to do the exam. However clubs and club membership is in decline and costs for clubs are increasing. Taking the exam is not an issue , in remote places it can be done at a local school. Sending a trainer to a persons house may involve having two trainers go to meet regulations. Doing the practical is the big issue and then  providing support after  the exam is passed.
If you want to do the practical at some ones house you need to take up two of every thing to do the contacts bit. You can not rely on other Radio Amateurs coming back to calls, you need to arrange for a second person to be out side with operational gear. When the exam is passed you will in many cases have to advise on what to do next and provide support to maintain interest.
I deal with one of the most remote areas of Scotland, training needs to be organised  to suit the convenience of the person seeking it
Barrie P Spink  GM0KZX 

On Thu, 10 Oct 2019 at 11:17, Allan Gallop <allangallop88@...> wrote:
Honestly I disagree, in fact clubs should be more involved in training and exams. My concern is with those who have difficulty traveling and/or otherwise disabled, with the new online exam system the avenue is now opened for potentially more people to be able to join the hobby, should club trainers be able to train and moderate exams from a person's home.. a feat only possible by local clubs. I think the RSGB should do more in the way of empowering clubs with tools to make this happen.

Re: Removing clubs from training and exams?

barrie_spink
 

No body would want to stop clubs doing training and in an ideal world there would be a club reasonably near to those that wanted to do the exam. However clubs and club membership is in decline and costs for clubs are increasing. Taking the exam is not an issue , in remote places it can be done at a local school. Sending a trainer to a persons house may involve having two trainers go to meet regulations. Doing the practical is the big issue and then  providing support after  the exam is passed.
If you want to do the practical at some ones house you need to take up two of every thing to do the contacts bit. You can not rely on other Radio Amateurs coming back to calls, you need to arrange for a second person to be out side with operational gear. When the exam is passed you will in many cases have to advise on what to do next and provide support to maintain interest.
I deal with one of the most remote areas of Scotland, training needs to be organised  to suit the convenience of the person seeking it
Barrie P Spink  GM0KZX 

On Thu, 10 Oct 2019 at 11:17, Allan Gallop <allangallop88@...> wrote:
Honestly I disagree, in fact clubs should be more involved in training and exams. My concern is with those who have difficulty traveling and/or otherwise disabled, with the new online exam system the avenue is now opened for potentially more people to be able to join the hobby, should club trainers be able to train and moderate exams from a person's home.. a feat only possible by local clubs. I think the RSGB should do more in the way of empowering clubs with tools to make this happen.

Re: Removing clubs from training and exams?

Allan Gallop
 

Honestly I disagree, in fact clubs should be more involved in training and exams. My concern is with those who have difficulty traveling and/or otherwise disabled, with the new online exam system the avenue is now opened for potentially more people to be able to join the hobby, should club trainers be able to train and moderate exams from a person's home.. a feat only possible by local clubs. I think the RSGB should do more in the way of empowering clubs with tools to make this happen.

Re: Removing clubs from training and exams?

Steve marsh (M0NMA)
 

I have mixed feelings. With the current exam structure, I disagree. However this has the problem that it is increasingly difficult to find somewhere nearby where you can take the exam. This results in new amateurs joining a club solely to sit the exam and then disappearing due to the distances involved, or giving up entirely because it is too difficult to get there.

If there was a new, very basic, licence then this could be done without involving any clubs but it would then give an opportunity for clubs to contact more outlying members using V/UHF repeaters to encourage them on their way towards higher licences where a practical and exam are needed. It might even encourage the creation of new repeaters....

Steve

Re: Removing clubs from training and exams?

RONALD WHITE
 

Disagree 

Ron



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
From: Pete M0PSX <group@...>
Date: 09/10/2019 21:08 (GMT+00:00)
To: main@hamclubs.groups.io
Subject: [Ham Clubs] Removing clubs from training and exams?

In a recent poll in the RSGB Workshop Chat Group, people were asked whether the club entry system for getting an amateur radio licence should be removed. Key to the discussion seemed to be that only a small number of clubs are offering training, making it hard for newcomers to find an exam venue and/or course.

90% of those responding were in favour of clubs being removed as the entry system for the hobby.

The discussion was here: https://groups.io/g/RSGB-Workshop/topic/34445155 - but this has now been locked by their moderator preventing further discussion.

Do you agree, or disagree with the poll findings?

Pete M0PSX

(Cross-posted to our Training, Clubs and Chat Groups - www.sxham.uk/discuss)

Removing clubs from training and exams?

Pete M0PSX
 

In a recent poll in the RSGB Workshop Chat Group, people were asked whether the club entry system for getting an amateur radio licence should be removed. Key to the discussion seemed to be that only a small number of clubs are offering training, making it hard for newcomers to find an exam venue and/or course.

90% of those responding were in favour of clubs being removed as the entry system for the hobby.

The discussion was here: https://groups.io/g/RSGB-Workshop/topic/34445155 - but this has now been locked by their moderator preventing further discussion.

Do you agree, or disagree with the poll findings?

Pete M0PSX

(Cross-posted to our Training, Clubs and Chat Groups - www.sxham.uk/discuss)

Learn - Code - Build

Antony Watts
 

We have just run a successful course at Banbury Amateur Radio Society, over a period of 4-6 months. This aimed to bring people up to speed on Arduino coding, RF power meter, Digital synthesis, and digital reception and modes.

If any other club is interested to have the material we generated for this please contact me. anronywatts@..., M0IFA

Re: One to rule them all

Steve marsh (M0NMA)
 

Trevor

I echo your comments - our experience is that the members area was not used and so has now been disabled. We have set up a groups.io closed mailing group that provides most of the functionality that a members area would have - message, file and photo folders are available as well as a wiki. In practice our website is now more of a window on the club, training, the hobby and our activities. It has some use to members but is more useful in attracting interest in us/the hobby.

We also have a facebook group that has many more non-members than members and only about 25% of the club use the FB group, We also have a Twitter account, which has a feed to the website so is a quick and easy way of updating our main page so that it appears current to visitors.

Re: One to rule them all

allangallop@...
 

Liz / Trevor, appreciate the feedback is very useful.

My initial thoughts on a members only blogroll was to give all members author rights to it so it could act as a dirty-forum / buy & sell but your right it probably wouldn't be all that useful

Re: One to rule them all

M5AKA
 

Liz,
 
My take on members only areas on club websites is they are a complete waste of time and effort.
 
The hard truth is that clubs with fewer than 50 members are unlikely to be capable of generating sufficient compelling content to make a Members Only area viable.
 
The question should be who exactly is going to be generating all the content for a members only area?
 
I know some clubs put their newsletter in a Members Only area. Now I view a club newsletter as something that should be spread far and wide to showcase and promote the club, but i acknowledge some clubs like to keep what they do secret.
 
73 Trevor M5AKA

Re: One to rule them all

Elizabeth Bruton
 

Thanks - I think separate plugin and theme would work best and all of
the features sounds useful. ODARS is a small club so I don't think
we'd have use for a members only blog roll but I'm sure other clubs
might.

Again thanks,

Liz

On Mon, 20 May 2019 at 06:51, <allangallop@...> wrote:

Hi Liz,
Thanks that's great, so maybe it would be best deployable as two separate packages, a theme and a plugin so existing sites can maintain their original theme?

I had a think last night of some features I'd like to see:
- Members as WP users (so users can maintain their own profiles, passwords, renewal details ala GDPR)
- New WP user groups
- Membership forms
- Integrate Privacy, GDPR & Cookie statements
- Members only blog roll
- Events Calendar w/subscribe
- Event Ticketing / Manager

The last idea I had was to include a facility to permit pages to act as independent blog rolls so all content can be delivered as Post's using categories instead of having to manipulate Pages


-