[Lnc-business] website motion

Tue Feb 16 21:03:15 EST 2016

Each of the 2015 and 2016 budget spreadsheets indicated they included $10k
of carry-over funds for the IT Committee.  See footnote (t) on the detail
page of those spreadsheets.

-Alicia

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for that response, Mr. Katz.  I hope other members of the body
> weigh in here.
>
> While we're on the topic, it is my understanding that the IT Committee was
> given a budget of $25,000 at the very first IT committee meeting.  They had
> one main goal: fix the website.
>
> We are now close to two years in and still have nothing to show for it.
>
> I wanted to point that out because unless I'm incorrect about that number,
> we don't even have to rearrange the budget to do it.  We just have spend
> what was allocated to make it happen.
>
> I am happy to use NationBuilder BTW.  It would be even cheaper at this
> point.  I can easily outsource the design of the website based on specific
> criteria.  I can get us back visual comps.  We can pick one.  They can beef
> it up.  NationBuilder can implement it.  For $25,000 I would expect that
> possibly almost overnight!  ...not really, but in the "Good, fast, cheap -
> pick two" world, $25,000 gets you a hell of a lot of GOOD and FAST when
> you're just need to design the site and not develop it.
>
> Kevin Ludlow
> Region 7
> 512-773-3968
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'll address Mr. Ludlow's open question, in the course of doing so, I
>> think I will address some of Mr. Riemer's points.
>>
>> As I said before, I don't know if our website is good or bad, and if it's
>> bad, I don't know why.  That doesn't matter, though, since I am not in
>> either of the two groups that would be reliable on this question:  web
>> developers and the target market.  Mr. Ludlow is in one of those groups, so
>> I believe him on that.
>>
>> I don't need to know what, precisely, is wrong with our website.  No one
>> elected me here because of my capacity for being impressed by websites.  I
>> do notice a few things - our home page is covered in text, while
>> Democrats.org is not, for instance.  I also happen to know that companies
>> don't just come up with websites that say what they want to say.  They
>> think carefully about who their messaging is targeting, and then pay people
>> to come up with sites that will speak to those people.  Do we have a solid
>> sense of our target market?  If not, I am not sure a web developer can
>> design something to do what we want.  I think we do, though, and I think we
>> could communicate our needs to a web developer, who knows how to make a
>> page accomplish the things we want to accomplish.
>>
>> I have no idea what makes one page appeal to one group and a different
>> page to another.  I see that the home page of Democrats.org displays very
>> brief "I'm a Democrat because..." statements, and asks users why they are
>> Democrats (getting customers to tell you how to sell to them seems useful).
>>
>>
>> That seems a pretty apt reason why this board shouldn't be asking
>> questions like "what's wrong with it?  what would you have it do instead?"
>>  If a programmer comes to Microsoft's board and wants funding to update
>> some program, the board doesn't try to second-guess that programmer, using
>> whatever coding skills they picked up at a weekend class at their local
>> public library.  They believe the programmer, then decide if the
>> expenditure to do the update fits into their strategic plans.  They
>> certainly don't say "we're not going to fund that, but I went to a
>> programming forum and found this bit of code...stick that into your program
>> instead and see if that works."  Instead, I'd suggest we do what we were
>> elected to do, and not things we weren't elected to do.
>>
>> Why do it now and not next budget year?  Well, that depends.  If we
>> believe that a better website would generate more votes, better candidates,
>> and more elected officials, what's the point of waiting?  If we have some
>> reason that more members, more donors, and more elected officials now would
>> be a bad thing, then yes, I agree, we shouldn't improve our largest
>> marketing presence now.  If not, then I don't see why we'd agree it needs
>> to be done, then wait.
>>
>> Will I support this proposal?  Most likely, but I'll want to know first
>> what's going on with the IT committee, which took on this project.  I don't
>> want bids coming in for two different overhauls, and I want to know where
>> they are in the process.  Certainly, the length of time we've been talking
>> about this is much longer than Mr. Ludlow tells us the entire project
>> usually takes, so I'm also curious why it isn't done already (and why we,
>> the LNC, don't give our committees more power to act on our behalf, rather
>> than making reports at quarterly meetings on which the LNC may or may not
>> act).
>>
>> So that's where I stand on this; pending seeing the actual motion and
>> hearing the IT committee report.
>>
>> Joshua Katz
>>
>>
>>
>> Joshua A. Katz
>> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:55 AM, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All:
>>>
>>> As I mentioned last week when adding to the agenda, I intend to pursue
>>> $20,000 from the budget and the blessing to spend that money on a 3rd party
>>> website development company for lp.org.  I have several highly
>>> qualified companies that I work with.  I've no intention of pursuing my own
>>> software company as a vendor.
>>>
>>> I will formalize the motion before Saturday.
>>>
>>> I was hoping to get an idea on who would be willing to support this
>>> motion.  I would note that this has been talked about for 2 years.  The
>>> website is horrible.  I am professionally qualified to lead this effort.  I
>>> am highly confident we can have the whole thing done in 6 weeks time (from
>>> whenever we get going).
>>>
>>> If there is a discussion to be had, please start that discussion here so
>>> we needn't waste time on the floor answering questions that could easily be
>>> answered on via email.
>>>
>>> I really hope this group is interested in pursuing this.  Please
>>> consider that we spend over twice as much annually sending printed pieces
>>> of paper as I am requesting for a the one-time development cost of what
>>> should be our single most valuable tool for marketing, branding, and
>>> general outreach.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>> Kevin Ludlow
>>> Region 7 Rep
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ========================================================
>>> Kevin Ludlow
>>> 512-773-3968
>>> http://www.kevinludlow.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ========================================================
> Kevin Ludlow
> 512-773-3968
> http://www.kevinludlow.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160216/bdfa3fe1/attachment-0002.html>