Na pgweb forum a lively discussion started around my challenge, which I addressed to our members. Separately, I had an email discussion with one of our members. I am including its transcript here to make the information complete.
Paul
Hello,
I am a member of LAA and a paraglider. On http://www.svazpg.cz/ I noticed the login fields, but nowhere to register.
Can you enlighten me how it works?
Does this mean there is no login for members yet?
Then I would like to ask how the election of the presidency and the discussion of issues work. When I looked at the website, I thought it would be a forum for discussions.
The conclusion of the article motivated me to ask:
"LAA is not some THEM. That's ALL OF US"
I think that if "all of us" are to be involved, we need to communicate and have space for such communication.
Michal
the login field is currently only for editors who can post articles on the website. In the future, we would like to expand the website with a "members only" section where there will be information that we are not interested in putting on the website for free use. I believe that, for example, information about union finances and the decisions and actions of the presidency can be this "sensitive content". At this point, all the information that is placed on the website can be seen by everyone.
The board is elected by the general meeting (the last one was held in November 2010).
The proceedings of the Presidency take place in the form of meetings, e-mail correspondence, or, now, using a Skype conference. The board solves the tasks arising from the resolutions of the general meeting, responds to members' suggestions received by email or solves the regular agenda arising during the year (organization of races, finances of the representation, etc.). The main reason is that different forums tend to degenerate into riddles of supporters of different opinions or outbursts of negatively-minded pilots, and the result of such actions is ultimately not clear. That's why we prefer emails or telephone discussions about specific initiatives with those who solve the problem. If we need the public to comment, we post our suggestions on the pgweb forum, which has a PG policy section created for this purpose.
The space to communicate with us via email or phone is listed in the contacts at http://svazpg.cz/predsednictvo-svazu-paraglidingu/predsednictvo-svazu-paraglidingu-kontakty and we will be very happy if our members get involved and help us.
Paul
In fact, I'm really surprised that the membership base is only reflected in one general meeting per year. It is obvious how many people will get there. By the way, how many members does the union have and how many were there at the General Assembly - according to the voting record, I'm guessing up to 30 heads. This is how VH of local flyers can be done, but national events?
Michal
The general meeting was announced both in the Pilot magazine and on the website of the Association and on the website of the LAA in accordance with the organizational rules of the Association. As general meetings are not mandatory, I cannot force members to attend them. As far as I can remember, the only general meeting with a high turnout was an extraordinary AGM in 2005 attended by around 250 members, which was called in response to an attempted hostile takeover of the union. Otherwise, the number of participants fluctuates around 50. Whatever we think about it, the VH is the main body of the union and we must respect it. Every member has the right to come here and formulate their demands, and the board must fulfill the resolutions of the VH.
Paul
I have no problem with the fact that VH is the main body. But it seems to me that there are a lot of cases where the members would like to know what is going on and express their views on things without having to wait for the autumn when the VH is somewhere far away. I am based on my conviction and experience that if there is interest from the management, they look for ways to effectively implement communication, today, after all, electronic voting can be ensured if it is really needed. Not everything has such weight that it has to go through VH.
Michal
You are right that members should be better informed. I will try to reach the members' section at the PG Association and inform there about ongoing projects. If our admin is willing, I'll try to open a discussion about it, but I can't guarantee if someone will discuss it. The topics tend to be relatively dry and in all cases "smell" of work.
Paul
I assumed that just after logging in it would be possible to get information about funding, projects, see if there is something happening nearby that I could help with and so on...
Are there any cases where a matter is dealt with and members are informed or invited to express their views before a decision is made? I didn't find anything like that in the PGpolitika section.
Michal
As I already wrote in the last email, we are preparing some non-public section for members, but I (specifically me) have not finished it yet. I avoid inviting members to express their opinion, because usually those with a negative opinion always speak up (because they have a reason to express themselves because what is being proposed is overwhelming to them), while members who agree with the proposal read the forum and do not react. Sometimes it is difficult to find consensus even among the seven members of the board, and the result is somewhere halfway.
Paul
I understand the concerns of the complainers. Then it is necessary to decide whether to maintain and deepen the situation where the members pay and do not talk about anything, or to take the risk and try to fulfill their own words (WE-THEM). Both at the same time are unsustainable and sometimes arouse greater passions than when the condition is admitted - pay and don't give a shit.
Michal
The desired state is - say what you want to happen and help make it happen.
Paul
The feeling of WE-THEM mentioned in the article calling for writing texts for the magazine actually seems apt to me, and when there was a short discussion about it on pgweb, I found out that I am not the only one who has that feeling and, above all, that it probably won't be only for a short time of my membership.
Michal
Yes, you are not the only one who has that feeling, but you are one of the few who started communicating with us and (maybe) has the desire to change something. LAA is an organization that has 4 unions that bring together pilots flying on completely different airplanes, and that also does its own administrative work. So those who are perceived as ONI sitting in Prague are officials paid partly by the state and partly by us (there are about 12 of them in total), whose task is to ensure that invoices are paid, pilot licenses are extended and insurance is valid, simply everything that our association maintains in walk. But apart from that, they also take care of other things that we often wouldn't think of solving, such as the use of our airspace, the promotion of our flying among legislators (who can strike us with a pen when it comes to that) and, in general, shouting all around us: " We are here! It's us! Those are not birds you see in the air! We fly and we enjoy it and we can do it. So respect us and let us keep doing it!” And trust me. Even if you don't know them and they seem like THEM, they do a huge amount of work for paragliding. Well, the second part is the ordinary pilots that we meet at the launch parties and we are happy that we can go flying together. Lots of great people, with lots of ideas worth implementing. That's US. So what's the problem? Because WE don't say anything to THEM. WE expect that THEY see into our heads and implement our ideas without us having to exert ourselves (we already pay contributions anyway). WE won't even write articles for Pilot or anywhere else. A look at the website and the number of new articles (about one every two months) always from the same graphomaniac clearly proves this. And so there is a communication vacuum and that WE-THEM feeling. In fact, it takes more than just telling THEM what we want once a year at the general meeting. In fact, WE have to start doing something for ourselves and then THEY will help us with it, and in the process we will only find out that there is no more WE and THEM and all that is left is all of US.
Paul
I am convinced that the center of gravity of the LAA's activity is elsewhere than in the publication of the Pilot. But I really have no idea what the organizational structure is, what the LAA has to decide within its own competence, what is the subject of its own decisions (i.e. members), what it received from state authorities, etc. I know that sometimes it takes care of the launch site (Pálava), other times rather not (some canceled case), he is dealing with insurance companies...
As a member, I really don't even know what we can talk about and what we can't because of higher binding regulations.
Michal
Yes, the focus of the activity is elsewhere than in issuing the pilot. The pilot is supposed to be an information channel. SvazPG tries to help with flight terrains. In fact, the Pálava is not a completely happy example, because it is open only to its own members so far and so far it was only about the location of the meteosonde. But last year we successfully saved Zlatník, supported Prašivá and Mravenečík, and the contract for the reopened Zbyslavec is currently being fine-tuned. In any case, it is necessary that one of our members is on site and the administrator of that terrain. As a member, you can try to screw up everything, and if it's over the line, you'll be gently warned about it. That's just how I do it.
Paul
If I compare it with the civic association around cars, there I had a sense of belonging and influence on the way things were done from the very beginning. Since there is an interest in communication and a feeling of "doing it for ourselves", the forum works, internal reports work, there are articles with votes, there is a wiki where users write experiences and instructions, people help each other, etc.
Michal
Yes, I am also an idealist and I would like to create a sense of belonging. And I think we are capable of that if we tell each other what is needed. At the moment, it works a bit stupidly, because the principle of the pyramid is turned on its head. Of our 1600 members, 50 will come to the General Meeting and they will appoint a seven-member board. The seven-member board then tasks the chairman and he works. I'm exaggerating a bit, but basically it's not far from the truth. And how much work do you think I am capable of doing for US as a normal person employed in the automotive industry (so I really work for a company at work) with two small children? Well Sincerely. I do what I can, and sometimes I can't do much.
Paul
That's exactly what I'm talking about. If there was better communication and a feeling that this part is up to us and we are doing it for ourselves, many people will help for free and gladly. Even myself, if I feel that it is useful.
Michal
OK. We will improve communication. Will it feel like it's up to us and we're doing it for ourselves? I will continue to be an idealist and I will hope so.
Paul
Now I realize that you are actually the author of the challenge. So I would like to ask what is the point of publishing the Pilot in its current form. It's really not clear to me. It is a magazine on glossy paper with several types of content:
1. advertising
2. reports
3. accident analyses, technology, specialist articles
4. narration
5. advertising
advertising is probably necessary so that publishing doesn't ruin us. Advertising must be desperately inefficient, it's much better to do this on the web. Points 2 and 3 are also on websites, people write them by themselves and others comment on them, add links to flight videos and such.
For me, the only necessary content is in point 3, and even here I think there is not the slightest reason to cut down trees and print it on paper. I really don't see a reason to finance the magazine in its current form with three hundred crowns.
Michal
Pilot is currently the only reading about amateur flying in the Czech language. Aviation and Cosmonautics is a magazine covering everything from historic warplanes to airliners, but it does not cover paragliding or other ultralight sports. Flying revue does not write about paragliding either. All historical efforts to publish an air sports magazine on a commercial basis ended as far as I can remember in 2001. The magazine has a huge advantage over the web in that it is edited. On the website, you can really find accident reports that were analyzed by their participants themselves, or by someone who saw the accident. But can you rely on it? You can also learn about the technique that such and such a parachute is worth **** and whoever bought it is ***. Well, the expertise of some articles can also be doubted with success. This does not happen in the case of a printed magazine, because there is an editorial board whose task is to read the articles before publication and catch problematic issues. I don't know how effective advertising is. And advertising helps us to have a magazine whose one issue costs CZK 25 for many years! Already in 2005, as the board of the PG Association, we considered a proposal to cancel the magazine in its paper form. At that time, we did not meet with the understanding of other unions, which, for example, have a different age spectrum of members. Not everyone in the world likes to sit at a computer. A paper magazine has the advantage that I can read it not only on the toilet, but also on the tram. By moving the content to the web, we would deprive less computer literate pilots of this option.
Paul
A web magazine can also be redacted, this is not an argument for a paper. However, careful editorial work only makes sense for part of the content. Talking about who flew where and what they saw there ... well, I really prefer to read it as the authors themselves wrote and felt, and I'm happy to forgive them for stylistic mistakes or imperfect format. Nobody is prevented from printing a piece even for the tram, if they no longer have a device to read it.
In addition, with electronicization, we will gain a huge advantage in searching, indexing... however, this only makes sense if the content is worth it.
Michal
Indeed, there are still people who do not have a computer or a printer at home. Well, would you believe it? Although I have a computer, I buy newspapers and read them. It is not only about age but also about attitude.
Paul
I see the paper form as necessary for things such as, for example, a large-format airspace map.
If someone were to ask me about the vision of how to proceed, I would say to move the content to the web - e.g. add articles about overflights to pgweb, link them with flight recordings, videos and improve, for example, the possibility of cooperation with Google Earth so that a person can simulate a flight .
Divide the professional and technical part into articles with discussion-explanation such as a list of regulations, regulations, laws, etc. Next, a freer section with tests and finally an experience forum or wiki. It will be full-text searchable, keeping the content up-to-date and compact. Advertising is common everywhere on the web, there is nothing extra to think about.
Why pay the editor-in-chief of Pilot and spend a lot of work on its creation, pay for printing and distribution when the value of the result for most people is not very high and, on the contrary, the value of the content would increase if it were in electronic form?
On the other hand, I would not regret spending three hundred for the development and operation of a functional and useful website.
Michal
The editor would still have to get paid (it won't be done by itself), the editorial board would also have to process the magazine, a new magazine format would have to be created (graphics + programmer) and so what would we save? Paper, printer and distribution. I don't know how much money it would cost. Yes, there could be a discussion under the articles, with all the positives and negatives it brings. Obviously, the credibility of such a site would eventually drop to the level of all the others around. Otherwise, I don't know how the value of the content would increase due to it being in electronic form. Valuable content is created by authors, and I wanted to encourage them to take action.
Paul
The editor would only work on those parts that require such supervision and care. Authors write by themselves and like to get good feedback from the community. See, skyfly. As the community grew weary, they stopped writing. As a newbie, I have nothing to write, but if I did, I would definitely not send it to Pilot. Why? Because I would link to it videos, photos, flight recording (tracklog) and I would be interested in the observations of fellow pilots. What would I gain by publishing in Pilot? Nothing. People who don't care will get it, won't watch the videos...
Michal
Skyfly was the first of its kind and mainly driven forward by Standa Hlavinka, who, however, at one time did it professionally and also wrote most of the articles himself. We also had our professional in Pilot, but he is no longer there. I can consider that the PG articles from the Pilot will be published in the members section of the PG Association and some evaluation and discussion will be done. But there is a lot of work behind it and I need to find someone who will spend that time on it, because I really don't have it.
Paul
If I were to request the complete financial documents for the year 2010 associated with the release of the Pilot, would I receive them? Would it be conceivable to do an analysis and let the members give their opinion on the next direction?
Michal
I would like it to be clear that the Union PG has only 2 representatives out of eight in the LAA council, and even if the members of our union clearly expressed their opinion that they do not want the Pilot magazine, it still means nothing if the argument is not bulletproof. We'll just be outvoted. However, I believe, given the above, that we do not have such an argument. That's why I wanted to focus on Pilot bringing interesting articles, and its quality rose in the eyes of our members, and the magazine was fun for them.
I think it's premature to do a financial analysis at this point and ask members if they want three hundred or twelve issues of flying reading until we've given the magazine a chance to improve. I just hope WE do something about it.
Paul
I'm not saying that I definitely want to cancel it. I was just asking about financing. I only know that the officially recognized part of financing is CZK 300/year. How much are sponsors, how much is advertising, how much is paid for content and distribution, how much is the price for one issue in a given circulation.
What are we publishing it for... if it's for LAA members, why don't we ask them what they would like to have there and in what form? Sure, they could make a different decision than suits those who are in charge of it and receive income from it, for example.
Michal
We publish the pilot for several reasons. It is not only a communication channel towards our members, but also an argument. The argument that is used when dealing with administrative authorities is: "Yes, we are a solid organization with a solid structure that is able to address and educate its members, and therefore you could allow us... for example, to extend the PG of pilots up to ten years." Or something else. I can ask about financing and the council, and very likely I will get some rough data. But it's unnecessary for me to rant about issues that the other members of the council are quite sensitive about.
Paul
I would appreciate, for example, a detailed description of the organizational structure of the LAA with an explanation in the Pilot on paper. This is something worth having on paper, no need to discuss it…. This would clear up a lot of confusion.
I personally see it in the way that there is a part of "THEY" in the LAA not because of a personal relationship, but because they ensure the performance of a part of, say, state administration. Then there is the "We" section, which can function as the members see fit. It is about not creating bad blood and not having false ideas and meaningless demands stemming from ignorance. On the other hand, so that we can work rationally and efficiently in the part that is only "ours" and that cooperation with the part "they", the state, etc., worked well.
My situation is such that I am personally most interested in the condition of the starters in Olomouc (considering the landscape, certainly also the winches/unwinders) and things related to flying - limited spaces at airports that are not functional (Přerov?)... Some coordination and help from the union and the LAA would definitely be needed in this area. TMA only bothers us, whereas UL can negotiate an in-flight transit.
Otherwise, the global issues of LAA do not concern me too much, if everything works somehow, so far I have had the best experience with negotiations - handling/extending the pilot, some kind of question via email.
I was particularly impressed by the electronic administration of the LAA, soberly processed and functional, and that, in my opinion, is exactly the path we should follow. I wouldn't normally comment on the Pilot either, if it weren't for the prompt.
If I had to express a conclusion for myself from this debate, I would like to learn what LAA looks like and offer help to "our" part.
Michal
If you really want to help the "our" part, take an interest in PG happenings in your area and she will eventually find a job for you. Confined spaces are a big problem because they are almost eternal. Finally, after many years, it was possible to remove the forbidden areas around Dukovan and Temelín from the map. Our representatives in the commission (I don't know what it's called) that decides on airspace continue to push for the reduction or cancellation of unused spaces, but it's really for years. At basically every LAA board, I stand by the map and poke my finger at those nasty blue and red things that get in the way of the map. So they know about it and they try.
Overall, I think we've come a long way since Pilot, however, it helped clarify attitudes a bit and clear the air. My challenge was essentially a plea for help. I learned a lot of things we do wrong. Never mind. Better than learning nothing.