|
Why?
Because people have gotten out of reptiles? It happens.
I think no matter what is attached to it, contributing membership will always be a battle. People will do it - for whatever their reasons - but a portion of them will not renew. Some may forget, some may not be able to afford it (I find that claim amusing most of the time, given some of the purchases made by the people using that excuse), and some may think they they don't get enough in return.
After that, there is the issue of maintaining a website. Sounds like a great idea; but not everybody enjoys it, or can do it themselves. Of course, the work involved is only a portion of that...there is also the cost - and if people "can't afford" the $25/year for a Contributor level membership, they sure can't afford a domain and hosting.
The GGC program wasn't a bad idea, but I suspect it didn't take off as well as Rich had hoped. The previous audit that I did was a while ago...and I'm not really sure what prompted me to do it. I suspect it started with something Rich mentioned, and - like this time - I took it upon myself to take a look. (I will say it is a lot easier with the workload divided!) With the new program, it was simple to see who was expired...last time, I had to check each person's account individually. If the program continues, I would suggest that some sort of audit should be done semi-regularly...maybe twice/year. Contacting member's whose subscriptions have expired with a reminder can be part of that.
IF it continues, I'll talk to Rich to see if there is anything I can do to help with the process. I know that setting them up manually is time consuming, and probably a pain in the butt; but I'm sure that a long waiting period after submitting the application is a disappointment, and I suspect that some people just never bothered to go back and put the certificate on their site.
I don't see the program as a failure, myself...but if greater numbers would make it seem better, then maybe we should look at the website requirement. Rather than turning people away from the program who don't want to maintain their own site, maybe the application could be amended to include a question along the line of: Do you have a website on which you will post the certificate? If the answer is no - they could be assigned a number, but not issued the code for the certificate. Every thing else would be the same - as far as the poll, and the standards for maintaining a positive trader rating and poll score. At audit time, with no website posted, there would be no need to check for the certificate. It would save time in set up, and open the program to more people.
Bottom line, a lot of the certificate holders are no longer using this site; and I think a sizable portion of them are no longer selling reptiles (or are doing so on a much smaller scale). Heck, it's no secret that I've been thinking about getting out, especially with the constant legislative efforts against reptiles - between the costs, the time, and the space, losing the snakes would change my life. I'd have more time to do things I enjoy, be able to go on vacations, and have more money to save (and spend). I don't think I'm quite there yet...but I'm closer than I've been in a long time.
|