42 replies to this topic

[marcshiman]

This post comes about after reading the "apology", followed by reading the thread to which the apology was attached. Rather than adding a month late to a conversation that has thankfully died a natural death, I want to start a new one with a different angle.

 

Why exactly does the PCA exist? I say that in total ignorance; really. What is its purpose? The pretty italics under its name on the website says "Keeping the history of writing instruments alive through member support and community education". So, its all about keeping the history of writing instruments alive (what follows "through" is just the how).

 

Is it the best vehicle for this sort of thing? Do we need to associate with one another to keep the history alive? (Does this association really give us a vehicle to associate with one another?) Is it better at keeping the history alive than FPN, Pentrace, Zoss, or this board? Is it better at keeping the history alive than Richard Binder's site, David Nishimura's site or Phil Munson's excellent site? 

 

If I felt it was a better vehicle than those listed above, I would probably renew my membership when it expires and pay whatever it costs. But frankly, I'm finding it hard to understand how its better. 

 

To be clear, I'm not talking about which is the best site for ME. I'm talking about what is the best source of information for our community. All of us. Capable of spending $40 or not. 

 

My concern is this - if keeping the history alive is the reason for its existence, and they did it very well, then I'm sure people who believed in that mission would pay (including me) regardless of what they got in return. However, the way in which this association seems to be headed is offering exclusive services that would compel me to pay them. That does not strike me as the definition of the term "association", as in people associating with one another for a purpose. 

 

To take it a step farther, as a seller of pens, I WANT a lot of people to know vintage pens. I want them to have plenty of information, and plenty of catalogs. PCA not only seems to not share that objective, but it wants to RESTRICT access to information. That is not a mission I want to be part of, and its not something I'm willing to financially support. I don't think that serves the objective of keeping the history of pens alive. 

 

If you are a volunteer - and you either write articles or scan old documents for the library - why do it for a group of 1000, and not simply post it on the major internet boards for tens of thousands to read? It just seems as though we are working to perpetuate an organization that only lives for its own survival. 

[Parker51]

Your statements touch on two issues which have long faced a variety of organizations; how to support them and who do they serve. Some organizations operate on purely voluntary contribution basis, some have membership fees, some serve only their members and some the larger society. Many combinations have been tried by many groups, with success or failure usually being a matter of chance, but this does not have to be the future. Research based decision making is possible to be applied to organizational finance. This is a branch of Economics not many are familiar with, but those of us who are could provide the framework to run the needed experiments. So, is there anyone else familiar with this branch of Economics?

[FarmBoy]

I suspect most of the dues money goes to the publication of the club magazine. If membership declines the run gets smaller and per copy costs go up. Providing additional on-line only content (the library) for subscribers is not unique to the PCA. And is a way of boosting subscription sales. That the library is principally an archive means that one could easily download all relevant content as a member then resign resulting in a short term spike in membership, not long term members.

Interesting topic.

[Roger W.]

The PCA exists, in my mind (and I was the last one to reincorporate it), as a group to gather information about vintage pens.  People can do this privately but most everyone is not interested in doing that level of research.  The library is a membership perk and I suppose we are bitching about the digital age as you used to have to pay for the photocopies to be produced so there was always a cost.  Now it is digital so that means it ought to be for free to many people.  The $40 historically, was for the cost of running the magazine as the library was a pay per use service as I stated above.  For folks getting started in the hobby the PCA serves as a place for source information that is better than buying the books with all of their inherent mistakes.  The cost is pretty minimal and they are making an effort to find and distribute vintage information.  I think the magazine drives most of the people associated with running the PCA so there is a need for money and the library gets dragged along as a perk - it is another reason to join and support the magazine.  David and Paul will be having a vintage magazine and they are charging for that which is necessary to offset its costs.  I don't know if their website will be wide open otherwise with archived materials.  Sure these things can be done as a labor of love.  My website has 800 or so scanned ads for Sheaffer that are freely available.  So the $40 for the PCA is for the magazine and they have decided that the library is a paid membership perk.  I don't have a problem with that as it helps drive people to pay for the magazine albeit fractionally as most people will NEVER use the library anyway.  If you helped to elect a Board that promised to make the library free to all I wouldn't have a problem with that either as most people never use the library, EVER (the revenue from photo copies was little bitty small even considering that it was done at cost - a point which I can not emphasize enough).  So why not just have it available for free and avoid any issue with people that decide to redistribute it of their own volition?  The Board has decided otherwise.  Elect a different Board. The PCA is organic in that sense. When I reorganized the PCA By-Laws with input mostly from Joel Hamilton and Len Provisor there wasn't a digital library so I never considered the issue on an organizational level.  I think I would have leaned on it being a membership perk so that there would another incentive to help pay for the cost of the magazine even with my emphasizing that the library is a marginal part of the PCA.  That is because the PCA is print magazine driven.  Now if you made the PCA a web driven organization I'd lean towards it being freely available.  It's an interesting question that didn't exist 9 years ago.

 

Roger W.

[David Nishimura]

I only recently joined the PCA board (though I was a board member before, many many years ago), and the following observations are my own, not any sort of official PCA statement.

 

It seems to me that the field of pen collecting is healthy and growing. Much of what has happened in the era of eBay and the Web has happened without any central direction, as many individuals and small groups have set up websites, blogs, forums, and club meetings, with all this being replicated yet again with the rise of social media.

 

At the same time, this sort of wonderful free-for-all has its problems. There are still a lot of veteran collectors whose participation in the online world (eBay excepted) is negligible. This is a double loss, since they have a lot to offer, and are also missing out on all the online world has to offer in turn. And even among those of us who are active online, the number of forums and other pen sites has increased to the point where it is all too easy to miss out on material of interest.

 

I think there is a real need for a standing organization that can bring everyone together, and to do the things that all the individual players out there can't or won't do on their own. The demise of Lion & Pen should have been a lesson to us all, that valuable information can be irretrievably lost if no one archives it (and no, it isn't in the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine). That sort of behind-the-scenes preservation activity is a perfect fit for an organization such as the PCA, and in fact the Librarian has been quietly working at it for some time now.

 

As for the whole issue of scanning and dissemination of research material, that's a biggie -- and one that really should have been a matter for open-spirited discussion, instead of unilateral action. For me, at least, there's no clear-cut solution. Free access to all is a wonderful ideal, yet as with other forms of content, if it's completely free, can we be sure that anyone will take the trouble to create more? It's easy to criticize the pay-for-access model, but I'd find the criticism more compelling (and constructive) if it offered some alternative mechanism to generate support for future digitization projects.

 

PS Despite all the recent heatedness about the PCA charging for access to the Reference Library, up until this summer (as Roger points out) no one apparently cared enough to even speak up about it. The PCA leadership is now being blamed for keeping the  library gates closed, which is rather unfair when no one at the time bothered to ask that they be opened.

Edited by David Nishimura, 11 September 2014 - 02:49 PM.

[Roger W.]

As for the whole issue of scanning and dissemination of research material, that's a biggie -- and one that really should have been a matter for open-spirited discussion, instead of unilateral action. For me, at least, there's no clear-cut solution. Free access to all is a wonderful ideal, yet as with other forms of content, if it's completely free, can we be sure that anyone will take the trouble to create more? It's easy to criticize the pay-for-access model, but I'd find the criticism more compelling (and constructive) if it offered some alternative mechanism to generate support for future digitization projects.

David;

 

I don't believe anyone is paid to digitize the catalogs the PCA has so I'm not sure how that has anything to do with pay-for-access.  Or why it being free would have any influence over someone taking the trouble to create more content.  Or how pay-for-access would effect future digitization projects.  I'll admit it could be that funds are being put together that will cover some aspect of digitization but, you have not laid out such a case.

 

 Roger W.

[Jon Veley]

I wouldn't have been named editor of the Pennant if I had not been a long-time supporter of the PCA's mission, which in my mind has been to compile and preserve historical information. 

 

Yes, there are other websites that offer a lot of information -- for example, Lion and Pen.  In fact, Lion and Pen is a perfect example for why I believe the PCA Is relevant and will continue to be relevant.  When the owners of the L&P website grew weary of maintaining the archive, they pulled the plug and so much valuable information and research that was available was lost - permanently.   Private websites exist only for so long as their owners choose to maintain them.  David could pull the plug on this board today and everything that is written here would also be lost.

 

I am involved in the PCA because it is the most enduring, permanent repository of information in existence.  When something is contributed to the PCA's archive, I believe it finds the most permanent home available for it -- one that outlives its contributor -- and it will be available for many generations to come.

 

One thing many members don't realize -- admittedly due to the PCA's past failures to promote it -- is that the PCA Library is not a static thing.  It continues to grow, expand and improve as members continue to contribute information to it.  That is something I want to capitalize upon, and in future issues of the Pennant will have a regular feature spotlighting what is new at the PCA's library.  Those who allow their memberships to lapse will be missing out on what is added in the future.

 

The Pennant is the journal of the PCA.  You don't buy a subscription -- it is something that is given to members in exchange for your membership in and support of the PCA's objectives in collecting and preserving information.  It is the PCA's biggest expense, but it is also the biggest draw which encourages people to join and support our mission. 

 

In recent issues, the quality of the content in the magazine has declined, and I can understand why members such as Marc might question their continued support of our project.  I was brought on board to reverse this decline.  I think you'll find that our next issue, now in final layout, does so.

 

In short, I see my membership in the PCA as participating in and contributing to something bigger than myself.  In return for my annual support, I get a nice magazine (even nicer now, I believe) as well as access to the PCA's permanent archive of information, which is valuable to researchers and enthusiasts. 

 

No organization can be any better than the people who contribute to it.  If nobody posted here there would be nothing to read, just the same as if nobody wrote anything for the Pennant.  Marc, I've enjoyed your posts on the "Fountain Pens" group on Facebook and I would be delighted if you (as well as all the other great minds that participate in discussions here) would consider contributing an article or three to our magazine.

[david i]

In recent issues, the quality of the content in the magazine has declined, and I can understand why members such as Marc might question their continued support of our project.  I was brought on board to reverse this decline.  I think you'll find that our next issue, now in final layout, does so.

 

 

I had not thought allowing George Rimakis and Danny Kirchheimer  to contribute had lowered the quality that much, but hey, to each his own.

 

However, I do see that the PCA really did put an emotionally insufficient soul  out as the Face of the PCA, further driving away involvement.

 

Saving grace is that I have it on good authority that a huge cache of public domain vintage pen documents will be  made available via DVD for nearly no cost (shipping, basically) and will be given away in person as well.  All because of the accusations hurled by one ill-tempered fellow.  It all works out. Soon, gatekeeper issues won't matter for public domain materials.

 

 

regards

 

david

[david i]

Your statements touch on two issues which have long faced a variety of organizations; how to support them and who do they serve. Some organizations operate on purely voluntary contribution basis, some have membership fees, some serve only their members and some the larger society. Many combinations have been tried by many groups, with success or failure usually being a matter of chance, but this does not have to be the future. Research based decision making is possible to be applied to organizational finance. This is a branch of Economics not many are familiar with, but those of us who are could provide the framework to run the needed experiments. So, is there anyone else familiar with this branch of Economics?

 

Do share.

Best Regards

 

dDavid

[david i]

I suspect most of the dues money goes to the publication of the club magazine. If membership declines the run gets smaller and per copy costs go up. Providing additional on-line only content (the library) for subscribers is not unique to the PCA. And is a way of boosting subscription sales. That the library is principally an archive means that one could easily download all relevant content as a member then resign resulting in a short term spike in membership, not long term members.

Interesting topic.

 

I would be curious to know the budget to send how many board members to how many pen shows.

 

regards

 

David

[david i]

The PCA exists, in my mind (and I was the last one to reincorporate it), as a group to gather information about vintage pens.  People can do this privately but most everyone is not interested in doing that level of research.  The library is a membership perk and I suppose we are bitching about the digital age as you used to have to pay for the photocopies to be produced so there was always a cost.  Now it is digital so that means it ought to be for free to many people.  The $40 historically, was for the cost of running the magazine as the library was a pay per use service as I stated above.  For folks getting started in the hobby the PCA serves as a place for source information that is better than buying the books with all of their inherent mistakes.  The cost is pretty minimal and they are making an effort to find and distribute vintage information.  I think the magazine drives most of the people associated with running the PCA so there is a need for money and the library gets dragged along as a perk - it is another reason to join and support the magazine.  David and Paul will be having a vintage magazine and they are charging for that which is necessary to offset its costs.  I don't know if their website will be wide open otherwise with archived materials. 

Roger W.

 

Hi Roger,

 

I should clarify one point, currently The Fountain Pen Journal-- also known as Fountain Pen Journal and as  Paul's Fountain Pen Journal--   is purely Paul's, though I am honored to have had a role in conceiving its current form. 

 

I was involved in initial discussions for the mag. I'm content to be the irritating grain of sand that leads to a pearl-- a role I have played before in pendom, but my  goal merely was to see a good mag born, one  run by a proven author/editor, who happens to be a good friend.

 

Though in initial chats we had played with  a partnership, it became clear to me quickly that Paul alone was the hurricane force making this happen, while I merely was a light breeze.  Within a month Paul had put together a remarkable list of article contributors, found major advertising-- indeed more efficiently than the entire PCA Board and employees managed the last few years, selling cover space quickly-- arranged for solid graphic design (though I'm sure the look of the mag will evolve over time), and had a first issue ready to go, starting from scratch, well earlier than PCA had its next issue in play.  During that time I managed to get one article in... and late at that

 

A couple of us will assist with proofing. Whether that makes us contributing editors or not remains uncertain.

 

I did assist with generating a rudimentary website (all my websites are rudimentary), which will I hope evolve over time, especially if a decent designer turns up.

 

The Archive-- despite the rather paranoid ravings that have popped up here and there-- likely will have only old issues of Paul's mags, and if that happens, will either offer hard copy for sale or might have a pay wall just for that obviously non public domain material, either for downloading or web- browsing. All in good time

 

So, I have no business stake in FPJ. It is all Paul.

 

What I have tossed into all this, besides badgering  Paul about the need for another mag, is  my considerable internet presence, using that  to boost and bolster the new magazine. In concert the Black Pen Society and with other future associations possible, FJP really is a process in evolution.

Time will tell, obviously, how this little project goes.

 

I remain disappointed that the Face of the PCA remains so insecure in his own work that he sees fit to condemn a predecessor, grossly lacking the class of his predecessor. So it goes.

 

Do peek at the Fountain Pen Journal website. Ideas to enhance it are welcome.

 

Fountain Pen Journal Website

 

regards

 

-david

[Roger W.]

 

I suspect most of the dues money goes to the publication of the club magazine. If membership declines the run gets smaller and per copy costs go up. Providing additional on-line only content (the library) for subscribers is not unique to the PCA. And is a way of boosting subscription sales. That the library is principally an archive means that one could easily download all relevant content as a member then resign resulting in a short term spike in membership, not long term members.

Interesting topic.

 

I would be curious to know the budget to send how many board members to how many pen shows.

 

regards

 

David

 

None.  2010 was the last year they had to report financial data to the IRS (now they file 990-N) and they'd been losing money for years.  The magazine takes up pretty much all the dues and advertising.  As a non for profit modest losses can be sustained for a long time as long as there are some reserves.  I imagine currently magazine cost is equal to or slightly less than dues and advertising making the PCA sustainable.  Board members are not inuring any personal benefit as this would be in contravention of the IRS tax code.  

 

Roger W.

[david i]

 

 

I suspect most of the dues money goes to the publication of the club magazine. If membership declines the run gets smaller and per copy costs go up. Providing additional on-line only content (the library) for subscribers is not unique to the PCA. And is a way of boosting subscription sales. That the library is principally an archive means that one could easily download all relevant content as a member then resign resulting in a short term spike in membership, not long term members.

Interesting topic.

 

I would be curious to know the budget to send how many board members to how many pen shows.

 

regards

 

David

 

 

None.  2010 was the last year they had to report financial data to the IRS (now they file 990-N) and they'd been losing money for years.  The magazine takes up pretty much all the dues and advertising.  As a non for profit modest losses can be sustained for a long time as long as there are some reserves.  I imagine currently magazine cost is equal to or slightly less than dues and advertising making the PCA sustainable.  Board members are not inuring any personal benefit as this would be in contravention of the IRS tax code.  

 

Roger W.

 

 

Hi Roger,

 

"Inuring" or "incurring"?

 

However, Your answer does not indicate to me how much of the PCA budget is used to subsidize  pen show attendance by members of the Board. I know there is a benefit/subsidy  for the PCA Editor for a component of pen show attendance, and hearsay has it  that Board members also receive that benefit.

 

I merely seek to quantify.

 

regards

 

david

[Roger W.]

 

 

 

I suspect most of the dues money goes to the publication of the club magazine. If membership declines the run gets smaller and per copy costs go up. Providing additional on-line only content (the library) for subscribers is not unique to the PCA. And is a way of boosting subscription sales. That the library is principally an archive means that one could easily download all relevant content as a member then resign resulting in a short term spike in membership, not long term members.

Interesting topic.

 

I would be curious to know the budget to send how many board members to how many pen shows.

 

regards

 

David

 

 

None.  2010 was the last year they had to report financial data to the IRS (now they file 990-N) and they'd been losing money for years.  The magazine takes up pretty much all the dues and advertising.  As a non for profit modest losses can be sustained for a long time as long as there are some reserves.  I imagine currently magazine cost is equal to or slightly less than dues and advertising making the PCA sustainable.  Board members are not inuring any personal benefit as this would be in contravention of the IRS tax code.  

 

Roger W.

 

 

Hi Roger,

 

"Inuring" or "incurring"?

 

However, Your answer does not indicate to me how much of the PCA budget is used to subsidize  pen show attendance by members of the Board. I know there is a benefit/subsidy  for the PCA Editor for a component of pen show attendance, and hearsay has it  that Board members also receive that benefit.

 

I merely seek to quantify.

 

regards

 

david

 

David;

 

It's a tax concept "inurement" and it applies to the Board and not employees.  PCA Editor can be compensated and Board members cannot - think inside dealing.  If they are being compensated it is against the IRS tax code.

 

Roger W.

[marcshiman]

Hi Jon,

 

I think you misunderstand my motivation for joining (or not joining). I will support a mission or an objective I agree with for my $40. I am not looking for a reward or a return on that for myself. The quality of the magazine doesn't make my decision. Similarly, I don't think you chose to become editor because there's something in it for you either. You did it because you believe in the purpose.

 

Unfortunately, I still can't see the purpose. 

 

Generally, I won't contribute to the magazine, because you limit its distribution. What little bit of nonsense I have to offer is for the public including those who aren't members of PCA. I believe in open source... I believe that information should be freely available. I'm a little skeptical of a revenue model that partially depends on aggressively limiting the distribution of information that is already in the public domain and should be available to all. 

 

I also don't think the magazine model is relevant in an age of social media. The reason these boards work SO well is because of the range of people that contribute, even if its just a few lines. I get much more from asking a question and getting 3 answers within 24 hours than I do reading a printed magazine.

 

Jon, if you can articulate an impact that PCA is trying to have on the pen community, and not the limited subset that pays dues to PCA, I'd be very willing to listen and probably willing to support it financially.

[david i]

 

 

 

 

I suspect most of the dues money goes to the publication of the club magazine. If membership declines the run gets smaller and per copy costs go up. Providing additional on-line only content (the library) for subscribers is not unique to the PCA. And is a way of boosting subscription sales. That the library is principally an archive means that one could easily download all relevant content as a member then resign resulting in a short term spike in membership, not long term members.

Interesting topic.

 

I would be curious to know the budget to send how many board members to how many pen shows.

 

regards

 

David

 

 

None.  2010 was the last year they had to report financial data to the IRS (now they file 990-N) and they'd been losing money for years.  The magazine takes up pretty much all the dues and advertising.  As a non for profit modest losses can be sustained for a long time as long as there are some reserves.  I imagine currently magazine cost is equal to or slightly less than dues and advertising making the PCA sustainable.  Board members are not inuring any personal benefit as this would be in contravention of the IRS tax code.  

 

Roger W.

 

 

Hi Roger,

 

"Inuring" or "incurring"?

 

However, Your answer does not indicate to me how much of the PCA budget is used to subsidize  pen show attendance by members of the Board. I know there is a benefit/subsidy  for the PCA Editor for a component of pen show attendance, and hearsay has it  that Board members also receive that benefit.

 

I merely seek to quantify.

 

regards

 

david

 

David;

 

It's a tax concept "inurement" and it applies to the Board and not employees.  PCA Editor can be compensated and Board members cannot - think inside dealing.  If they are being compensated it is against the IRS tax code.

 

Roger W.

 

 

Hi Roger,

Thanks for clarifying that term. I had not heard it used before in the context of tax jargon.

 

Your observations  though still do  not answer my question about what is happening regarding PCA travel subsidies for board members, merely about what you note to be the tax-code about such things.

 

regards

 

david

[david i]

Hi Jon,

 

I think you misunderstand my motivation for joining (or not joining). I will support a mission or an objective I agree with for my $40. I am not looking for a reward or a return on that for myself. The quality of the magazine doesn't make my decision. Similarly, I don't think you chose to become editor because there's something in it for you either. You did it because you believe in the purpose.

 

Unfortunately, I still can't see the purpose. 

 

Generally, I won't contribute to the magazine, because you limit its distribution. What little bit of nonsense I have to offer is for the public including those who aren't members of PCA. I believe in open source... I believe that information should be freely available. I'm a little skeptical of a revenue model that partially depends on aggressively limiting the distribution of information that is already in the public domain and should be available to all. 

 

I also don't think the magazine model is relevant in an age of social media. The reason these boards work SO well is because of the range of people that contribute, even if its just a few lines. I get much more from asking a question and getting 3 answers within 24 hours than I do reading a printed magazine.

 

Jon, if you can articulate an impact that PCA is trying to have on the pen community, and not the limited subset that pays dues to PCA, I'd be very willing to listen and probably willing to support it financially.

 

Hi Marc,

I don't know the long term prospects for magazines and indeed books as we move into digital age.

 

Even as I acknowledge that an entire generation comes into play that perhaps has no need or desire to have watches, printed books, printed magazines, and DVD's, while seeing that lack have nearly no impact on their lives, I do find merit in the notion of magazine, in whatever milieu it appears. Message boards have power, but crowd-sourced answers often offer  significant noise-to-content.  An edited mag, especially when word-count is limited, requires efficiency, brevity, focus, things often lacking in web babble, certainly often lacking in my web babble.  I enjoy working sometimes within  the constraints of a magazine article.

 

regards

 

david

[marcshiman]

David,

 

Fair points on the magazines - with the caveat that there are circumstances that the social media model has its advantages as well, and that's reduced the value of the magazine from where it stood pre-social media days.

 

But really, if its all just about a magazine, why all the pretense with a board of directors, website with all sorts of different things unrelated to the magazine, etc. Why not just print a journal and charge for it? (I think I know your answer to that already).

 

Marc

[Rick Krantz]

I think I am in the same boat as Marc, I simply don't see a lot of benefit in joining the PCA, for me personally.

 

He raised a lot of valid points, and quite frankly, I think the PCA has presently, and in the past, a huge PR problem. 

 

I'm hoping Jon can do good for the organization, I like him, I have shared many meals with him and my family, I consider him a close friend, and wish him a high level of success. 

[Ron Z]

Lisa hasn't been able to post a message here - so she asked me to.

For the record - the source(s) for Davids rumors are wrong. The PCA boards members do not get paid, do not receive stipends, do not get money to go to pen shows. They/we have not for over a decade. The editor (who is not a board member) did receive a stipend to attend pen shows on behalf of the PCA, but it was deleted from the current editors contract.