|
On 12/7/2015 6:07 AM, Ed Futcher wrote:
I filled this out a few days ago. While I was speaking for myself, I tried to reflect the conclusions we had reached while discussing it in the tower a while back - that we thought biweekly (rather than weekly) publication would be the best cost-saving measure, that having a paper copy for the tower (rather than an electronic copy) was a valuable thing, because of the pleasure of passing it around and discussing articles during break times, and that whatever they do to encourage more people to subscribe won't work for us, due to the steep cost (this year we paid about $240.00 for the Old North subscription, and dutifully added "donations" in advance for a predicted year's worth of quarters, at $7.50 each, as far as I remember). NAGCR member Madeleine Cheesman wrote a letter to the editor in the RW earlier in the fall, pointing out the steep cost compared to a UK scientific journal she subscribes to. The response as printed in another letter to the editor was that the journal was under-priced. Kind of missing the point, I think. By all means, respond. I shouldn't be the only Boston area reader with an opinion. Laura Dickerson |