CFC Webzine - A Bold Experiment...but....

[Bob Armstrong]

I had concerns about the ability of the CFC to sustain this webzine when it was first proposed. It is not that it is a bad idea - and giving the members' a private section was a good idea - part for the public; part for members only.

But it has to be attractive to be worthwhile. And to be attractive, it has to have enough new material on a regular basis that people come back regularly to check it out. When someone comes back a couple of times and sees no new material, then they may well strike it from their list of regular chess websites they visit. I have just gone through all the open and " member only " topics, and there is seldom recent material ( ie. within the last month - in fact I think there is only one article ).

It takes both person power and $$ to make a webzine successful, and I don't think the CFC has either to accomplish the task. A bold experiment, but a lackluster product I'm afraid ( while acknowledging that there have been some good articles, intermittently since January 2009 when it started ).

Bob

[John Coleman]

I fail to understand how this can have happened. Wasn't Lawrence Day supposed to be the editor? Why is there no new material?

It is likely that the webzine reflects the CFC itself. Unfortunately.

[Christopher Mallon]

The whole webzine did not turn out exactly as we envisioned it.

I have put money in my proposed CFC budget for this fiscal year for a professional redesign of the entire CFC web presence including the main website and the webzine.

I personally have read only one thing on the current webzine, I found it too annoying to navigate.

As for content... I don't know what's going on with that.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Chris:

If CFC is going to put some $$ into it ( congratulations if you found a way to get some $$ for it, given lean times ), and allocate some E.D. time to updating it on a regular basis ( he must continually market the webzine and beat the bushes for members to send in " free " articles, to compliment the " paid " freelance/regular columnist ones ), then I will give it a second chance - I do think it is a good idea to have it and have part of it as a " member only " benefit - but that section must have some value to members by having regular new articles. My concern has not been the idea - it is worthwhile. My concern is whether the CFC can deliver on the promise, in competition with all the other chess websites, with updating material on a daily basis.

Bob

P.S. Thanks for your candidness on viewing the current webzine as a failure ( or almost so ). Those of us with concerns now know even the Executive shares our view.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

The whole webzine did not turn out exactly as we envisioned it.

What have we learned, if anything?

[Jason Lohner]

Now that the e-zine has been set up, the cost to maintain the magazine should be very small. The only thing it needs is for people to submit articles. That's up to all of us. Not enough articles? perhaps we should submit some

Just a question... do you need to be titled to submit an article? or can anyone submit one?

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Jason:

You needn't be titled - I've had four of mine published ( though one got pulled on me because it was apparently " controversial " ).

I did try to support the webzine when it first came out. It was a modest effort, and I had serious reservations, but since the Governors apparently wanted it, I tried to be supportive, and submitted articles. But it wasn't up to the task, and the lack of new material on a regular basis was a death knell.

Bob

[Stephen Wright]

I fail to understand how this can have happened. Wasn't Lawrence Day supposed to be the editor? Why is there no new material?

It is likely that the webzine reflects the CFC itself. Unfortunately.

Lawrence was appointed editor, but Vincent Chow took over to provide the necessary technical skills. I'm guessing, but it appears that since Bob Gillanders et al. left in early May there hasn't been a replacement editor - or he/she is keeping a remarkably low profile if there is.

[Christopher Mallon]

Actually, Lawrence quit, and only then did we decide to go a different route for the editor position.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Chris:

I thought it was posted at some point by someone in the know, that it was a question of website technical skill. I thought it was said that Lawrence had engaged Bill Evans to assist him in the technical side, but Bill was found not to have the necessary skills, and so Lawrence's appointment had to be rescinded, as he couldn't meet the editorial qualifications re handling the website. Can you shed more light on this for us?

Bob