GOAL and the Outdoor Message - What the hell?

[dwarven1]

OK, how about 174 posts and almost 9AM the next morning and still NOTHING from GOAL?

I'm pretty sure they get in at 9 AM...

I just think theres much better ways to spend that $100K.

Mass legislators... the best money can buy? Can we buy us a Speaker Of The House? I understand they're for sale!

 

[Bob P]

Or, the person from GOAL that posts here could be trying to get answers for everyone and decided not to post until they have a clear answer. My god...the way you people bitch and moan about $8/year is insane. I personally don't think that GOAL has any grand conspiracy to line the pockets of a newspaper company. If some of you have such little trust in them then why do you bother being a member? Some more food for thought...There are still a ton of people that do not use computers at home and the older generation probably never will. Going to an electronic newsletter was brought up at one of our club meetings and a surprisingly large number of the older members said that they don't have email. I personally don't read through a lot of TOM, but it's still a nice little rag to have beside the shitter.

So basically you're telling us to 'trust your betters, they know what's good for you'?

Uh huh. How's that working out for you in MA?

 

[Big_Red]

I'm pretty sure they get in at 9 AM...

Well, it is almost 10AM and...I think I've had enough fun with that.

 

[rwl1955]

I like and read the newspaper, especially Mike`s column.

 

[ChargingCharlie]

Read the whole thread. I ATTENDED a BOD meeting and have been trying to get this question answered since. My answer has been crickets.

I'm a little confused here. It the 1st post you said that you read about this a few weeks ago, but then you said you attended a GOAL BOD meeting a month and a half ago and asked about this. So which is it?

So basically you're telling us to 'trust your betters, they know what's good for you'?

Uh huh. How's that working out for you in MA?

I don't consider GOAL "my betters"...I'm part of GOAL. I have trust in some people and organizations and don't scrutinize everything they do.

 

[MassMark]

That was my earlier question, what do they get back from using OM?

I think they spend $90,000 to get 4 pages a month sent to their members. The Outdoor Message gets all advertising revenue.

 

[Bob P]

I'm a little confused here. It the 1st post you said that you read about this a few weeks ago, but then you said you attended a GOAL BOD meeting a month and a half ago and asked about this. So which is it?


I don't consider GOAL "my betters"...I'm part of GOAL. I have trust in some people and organizations and don't scrutinize everything they do.

I read about it here, did some research and attended a meeting.

I'm glad you trust some people. So you don't bother checking your credit card statement, right? Because you trust the merchants you do business with and you don't scrutinize your investment portfolio, right? Because you trust them.

There is trust and there is trust. When I see a questionable charge on my statement I make some calls. If I don't get an answer I like I press further until I do.

 

[EddieCoyle]

Well, it is almost 10AM and...I think I've had enough fun with that.

If I was on the GOAL BOD, I'd tell my Executive Director (who works for the BOD) and all of his people not to respond to this thread on their own.

I'd be shocked if that hasn't happened here.

Besides, the people we all talk to at GOAL have zero control over all this. What are they supposed to say?

 

[ChargingCharlie]

I read about it here, did some research and attended a meeting.

I'm glad you trust some people. So you don't bother checking your credit card statement, right? Because you trust the merchants you do business with and you don't scrutinize your investment portfolio, right? Because you trust them.

There is trust and there is trust. When I see a questionable charge on my statement I make some calls. If I don't get an answer I like I press further until I do.

What I'm confused about is how you learned about it hear "a few weeks ago" and then went back in time "a month and a half ago" to the BOD meeting. Verifying my credit card statements, bank statements, or any other financial transaction is far different than freaking out over a civil rights group using $8/year per member to get a publication out to it's member base.

 

[Bob P]

What I'm confused about is how you learned about it hear "a few weeks ago" and then went back in time "a month and a half ago" to the BOD meeting. Verifying my credit card statements, bank statements, or any other financial transaction is far different than freaking out over a civil rights group using $8/year per member to get a publication out to it's member base.

It's called 'verbal shorthand'. I said 'a few'. It's a nebulous term. I apologize for not finding the exact post and putting an accurate statement as to the number of days involved in my OP. Mea Culpa.

EDIT

And I'm not freaking out. I'm asking they look at how $96,000 a year is being spent. It's a bit more at stake here than $8.

EDIT

Actually looking at my OP, I said 'some weeks ago'. Not 'a few'.

 

[Big_Red]

What are they supposed to say?

How about "Hey everyone, we are aware of your concerns and we will address them as soon as possible".

Anything is better than nothing. At the very least they could acknowledge this thread.

 

[Mike-Mike]

I would imagine that $5 out of $8 per year is spent on the postage.

ETA: I would also assume that goal would use direct mailing anyhow even if the paper was gone.

 

[cekim]

What I'm confused about is how you learned about it hear "a few weeks ago" and then went back in time "a month and a half ago" to the BOD meeting. Verifying my credit card statements, bank statements, or any other financial transaction is far different than freaking out over a civil rights group using $8/year per member to get a publication out to it's member base.

The concern here is not just about $8/year per member.

When you give money to an organization such as this, you do so with the expectation that it is being used (judiciously) for the purpose the organization is chartered.

If either the money is not being spent wisely (overpaying for a given service), or someone within the organization has a conflict of interest which impairs the organization's ability to make sound decisions on how to spend the money, then we have a serious problem.

There is also the matter of the public image of the organization for political purposes if such a conflict or mismanagement exists. Two bad things can happen:
1. The organization can have difficulty maintaining members or attracting new members in the face of concerns about how membership dues are used.
2. The political opposition can use questions of integrity to distract the political process and prevent the organization from being effective.

Saying "it's only $8/year per member" is ridiculously short sighted and the reason the culture of corruption exists/persists/thrives in this state.

 

[Bob P]

I would imagine that $5 out of $8 per year is spent on the postage.

Postage for what? The paper? Maybe, but who can tell? It isn't owned by GOAL so we have no idea what the costs involved are. I have 2 concerns. 1) is it the best use of the money being spent and if so then 2) are they getting the best deal they can on it?

I don't think those are unreasonable questions for members to be asking. Especially when we're talking about what appears to be 1/3 of their annual budget.

 

[mark056]

WOW...this is one of the most incredible threads that I have ever read on this Forum. I think it underscores a widening gap between younger and older shooters. I also think that there are some assumptions being made about the value of the OM. First, although I use a computer everyday and rely on the internet for accessing lots of newspapers, I still enjoy reading hard print media to include newspapers, books and magazines (I am not ready to go Kindle or Nook yet, that's coming). Second, Being an old line shooter, I am actually interested in shooting events and competitions that are happening throughout the Commonwealth and also what is happening at the clubs.

I would venture to say that many of you don't "get" us older shooters and I see the F word (as in Fudd) thrown about quite liberally. The point is that many of us grew up in small town or rural environments, we camped, we fished, we hunted and we may have also competed in traditional competitive shooting. We grew up with guns, our mothers and fathers encouraged us to shoot, we had guns at home. Today there are a lot of younger shooters who grew up in urban environments, where gun ownership was met with suspicion by family members, people don't hunt or compete in bullseye competitions, and many have never really experienced the out of doors by camping. For them, shooting is having an AR and a high tech semi-auto pistol. Now is this necessarily bad? Not in the least but it shows to me a sea-change in where things are going.

In many respects, this thread doesn't even belong on NES for the simple reason, that people are bitching and griping. Who should be hearing this? The Goal BOD. If you are a member of GOAL ask the tough questions to GOAL, not to NES. To those of you who say, why isn't GOAL responding, well why should they? They don't have an obligation to answer to a bunch of internet malcontents in a venue that is not theirs. If anything, this thread should be sending a message to GOAL, and I am sure that they are lurking.

Now some of you question the relevancy of GOAL today. Well if GOAL had not succeeded "back in the day" then things would be much worse in Mass than they are now. Perhaps GOAL needs to reevaluate its marketing thrust to meet changing demographics. As far as any conflicts of interests go, what happened to all those unfettered Objectivist capitalists out there, who complain when measures are taken to "level the playing field ?"

To those who say that we need to start yet another pro-2A organization, I would say that would just add to the fragmentation in the gun owning community. We have Comm2A which is dealing with gun laws within the context of the legal system, and we have GOAL which is essentially a lobbying organization. The two are not incompatible, and I think complement each other.

I don't know if Yacino is a good guy or a bad guy, but he has been around for a long time. Some of the comments directed to him seem to be more of an ad hom nature. I know that over the years he has done more good than harm. Maybe if somebody else had been willing to step up to the plate things might have been different and maybe even better, but nobody did.

Ya know, I think a lot of people complain about things on this Forum, yet I don't overall see a lot of activism by some of the most prominent complainers. This of course, is not universally true, and there are those who have done a helluva lot over the years, I am not going to mention them by name because I might forget somebody.

So, if you don't like the way GOAL is being run, let your voice be heard in the organization. Become active or become an activist, but that might mean getting up behind a computer screen and actually interacting with flesh and blood people, and leaving your house.

And one other thing: please don't generalize about the OM. Some of us do like to read it, don't assume everybody finds it useless. Oh some of you can call me a FUDD or a geezer (jeesh I even like revolvers and bolt guns) but in this day and age can any of us afford to alienate any segment of the gun owning community as long as they support the 2A? Our enemies love to divide and conquer.

My two cents...anyway

 

[ChargingCharlie]

It's called 'verbal shorthand'. I said 'a few'. It's a nebulous term. I apologize for not finding the exact post and putting an accurate statement as to the number of days involved in my OP. Mea Culpa.

EDIT

And I'm not freaking out. I'm asking they look at how $96,000 a year is being spent. It's a bit more at stake here than $8.

$96,000/year for publication costs is nothing. For $96,000/year they are getting their newsletter printed in the paper every month, they get the GOAL name out to tons of people that aren't GOAL members because TOM goes out to tons of clubs that have members that are not members of GOAL, and it also gives GOAL members a glimpse of what is going on in other clubs around MA.

 

[JuergenG]

As members we are asking probing questions that require clarity and transparency. It seems GOAL was given a chance to answer these questions and has not done so. That's just not right.

So why aren't these probing questions asked directly to the GOAL BOD, rather than
breaking loose a sh.tstorm on this board?
If I'd be in Jim Wallace's shoes I would NOT respond to this thread containing a lot
of speculation, insult and maybe even personal vendetta.
Just my $ .02

 

[Bob P]

So why aren't these probing questions asked directly to the GOAL BOD, rather than
breaking loose a sh.tstorm on this board?
If I'd be in Jim Wallace's shoes I would NOT respond to this thread containing a lot
of speculation, insult and maybe even personal vendetta.
Just my $ .02

Read the thread. They were asked on 6/6/11. They haven't been answered.

 

[MassMark]

I would imagine that $5 out of $8 per year is spent on the postage.

ETA: I would also assume that goal would use direct mailing anyhow even if the paper was gone.

I'd like to see the figures on that. I'd also like to see the figures on ad revenue and why GOAL is not receiving that ad revenue - or at least a portion of it, to filter back into the 'fight'....

I think as far as profit goes, $90k is a drop in a likely larger bucket....

 

[Mike-Mike]

Postage for what? The paper? Maybe, but who can tell? It isn't owned by GOAL so we have no idea what the costs involved are. I have 2 concerns. 1) is it the best use of the money being spent and if so then 2) are they getting the best deal they can on it?

I don't think those are unreasonable questions for members to be asking. Especially when we're talking about what appears to be 1/3 of their annual budget.

I don't think they are unreasonable question either. But I do believe that goal would send out 6-8 (if not more) direct mailings a year that are now avoided because they can include the information in the paper. So the demise of the paper could actually cost more than to carry it. I think its a good discussion, but I think the "It would save $90k" Argument is not well founded.

 

[Bob P]

$96,000/year for publication costs is nothing. For $96,000/year they are getting their newsletter printed in the paper every month, they get the GOAL name out to tons of people that aren't GOAL members because TOM goes out to tons of clubs that have members that are not members of GOAL, and it also gives GOAL members a glimpse of what is going on in other clubs around MA.

Tons? Really?

$96k may be nothing - or it may not. Again, I'm asking that they look at how the money is being spent - do a CBA and if that's the best use of it fine, do the newsletter - but be sure that you're getting the paper done for the best price you can get. Is that being done here? I don't know. Why don't I know? Because GOAL's BOD hasn't answered my questions. Why did I put it here? Because I thought some of you might have the same questions as I.

Given some of the responses, it seems there may be more going on here than just the issue of the newspaper. I don't know about that, I just know 1/3 of GOAL's annual budget goes for 4 pages in a newsletter that goes out to MOSTLY GOAL members.

So you're spending 1/3 of my dues to tell me what you're doing for me?

Is that a good return on my money?

 

[dwarven1]

Postage for what? The paper? Maybe, but who can tell? It isn't owned by GOAL so we have no idea what the costs involved are. I have 2 concerns. 1) is it the best use of the money being spent and if so then 2) are they getting the best deal they can on it?

I don't think those are unreasonable questions for members to be asking. Especially when we're talking about what appears to be 1/3 of their annual budget.

1 - I'm sure they know about it.
2 - Why did this suddenly become SO urgent that you couldn't attend the next BOD meeting and ask again?
3 - I'm sure that GOAL is thrilled at all the support they're getting in this thread.
4 - I'm sure that all gun-banners on Bacon Hill are even more thrilled that GOAL's own members are turning on their own organization.

 

[Bob P]

I don't think they are unreasonable question either. But I do believe that goal would send out 6-8 (if not more) direct mailings a year that are now avoided because they can include the information in the paper. So the demise of the paper could actually cost more than to carry it. I think its a good discussion, but I think the "It would save $90k" Argument is not well founded.

Good point - but would they have to do it as direct mailings? Didn't GOAL send something about last year about a 'paperless' option? I'll have to look back though my email (yes, it's a mess) to see if I can find anything on that.

If they DIDN'T it would be a great idea. Figure if even HALF of the member chose paperless (and yes I'm generalizing here but I suspect most of the under 40 crowd would) that would represent a significant savings.

 

[MassMark]

1 - I'm sure they know about it.
2 - Why did this suddenly become SO urgent that you couldn't attend the next BOD meeting and ask again?
3 - I'm sure that GOAL is thrilled at all the support they're getting in this thread.
4 - I'm sure that all gun-banners on Bacon Hill are even more thrilled that GOAL's own members are turning on their own organization.

GOAL needs to wake the hell up. Bob took this issue up with GOAL on 6/6/11 and is being blown off, (and not in a good way), with excuses. I find it amazing how the standard-bearers for GOAL's omnipotence, continually ignore this fact...

ETA: GOAL seems perfectly willing to use the resources at NES to announce their activities and/or to bitch-slap NES members for not attending a goddamned cocktail party. It's awfully convenient, that they have a history of fading away when a member of the same resource expresses concerns...

 

[JuergenG]

To those who say that we need to start yet another pro-2A organization, I would say that would just add to the fragmentation in the gun owning community. We have Comm2A which is dealing with gun laws within the context of the legal system, and we have GOAL which is essentially a lobbying organization. The two are not incompatible, and I think complement each other.

This!
Starting yet another organization = split of forces into x number of small groups
being much more vulnerable to the gun grabbing politicos and overall reduction
of powers.
Been there, got the scars to prove it.

 

[Bob P]

1 - I'm sure they know about it.
2 - Why did this suddenly become SO urgent that you couldn't attend the next BOD meeting and ask again?
3 - I'm sure that GOAL is thrilled at all the support they're getting in this thread.
4 - I'm sure that all gun-banners on Bacon Hill are even more thrilled that GOAL's own members are turning on their own organization.

What would the point of attending ANOTHER meeting be when they haven't answered my questions the first time I raised them or on the 5 times I followed up with them via email?

Who's turning on GOAL? I'm asking a question - I'm not allowed to ask a question without being 'disloyal'? Herr grupenfuerer, I am sorry for doubting der party line! I vill shut up now und be a gut little footsoldier.

Gee Ross, for a guy that's always spouting off about 1775, you're not sounding very revolutionary.

 

[jasons]

As a GOAL life member I would like to see this question get answered. Until then I reserve judgement.

 

[MassMark]

What would the point of attending ANOTHER meeting be when they haven't answered my questions the first time I raised them or on the 5 times I followed up with them via email?

Who's turning on GOAL? I'm asking a question - I'm not allowed to ask a question without being 'disloyal'? Herr grupenfuerer, I am sorry for doubting der party line! I vill shut up now und be a gut little footsoldier.

Gee Ross, for a guy that's always spouting off about 1775, you're not sounding very revolutionary.

You need to ask a mea culpa Bob for not being a shill. Now be a good sheep, pick up the colors and question nothing...

 

[EddieCoyle]

TOM goes out to tons of clubs that have members that are not members of GOAL, and it also gives GOAL members a glimpse of what is going on in other clubs around MA.

There are about 200 gun clubs in Mass. TOM has newsletters for 19 of them, including one of the clubs I belong to.

That's not even 10% of the clubs in Mass.

 

[ChargingCharlie]

There are about 200 gun clubs in Mass. TOM has newsletters for 19 of them, including one of the clubs I belong to.

That's not even 10% of the clubs in Mass.

It goes out to 23 clubs and the members of GOAL as well as the members of the Rhode Island State Rifle & Revolver Association

This is the list from their website.

Gun Owners' Action League - Massachusetts
The GOAL Foundation - Massachusetts
Rhode Island State Rifle & Revolver Association - Rhode Island


Ayer Gun & Sportsmen's Club - Ayer, MA
Barre Sportsmen's Club - Barre, MA
Cape Cod Fish & Game Association - North Harwich, MA
Copicut Rifle Association - Fall River, MA
Fin, Fur & Feather Club of Wellesley and Natick - Millis, MA
Fitchburg Sportsmen's Club - Fitchburg, MA
Georgetown Fish & Game Association - Georgetown, MA
Hamilton-Wenham Rod & Gun Club - South Hamilton, MA
Hanson Rod & Gun Club - Hanson, MA
Holyoke Revolver Club - Holyoke, MA
Independent Sportsmen's Club - Foxboro, MA
Mansfield Fish & Game - Mansfield, MA
Maspenock Rod & Gun Club - Milford, MA
Old Colony Sportsmen's Association - Pembroke, MA
Shirley Rod & Gun Club - Shirley, MA
South Fitchburg Hunting & Fishing Club - Townsend, MA
Southborough Rod & Gun Club - Hopkinton, MA
Standish Sportsman's Association - East Bridgewater, MA
Uxbridge Rod & Gun Club - Uxbridge, MA
Westwood Gun Club - Medfield, MA
Woodville Rod & Gun Club - Woodville, MA
Worcester Pistol & Rifle Club - Boylston, MA
Wrentham Sportsmen's Association - Wrentham, MA