In a recent MMD, Larry Norman makes a defense of member-only sales and
what came across as an impassioned plea for people to join the AMICA.
With respect, I say "Bah."

There are many organizations that I would happily join if I had the
time to enjoy the membership.  Unfortunately, when you add it up,
there's no point in paying many of them for a newsletter announcing
events that I won't attend.  Of course there are other benefits, one
can't discount that; however, what are they worth to me? (By the way,
I'm not saying that the AMICA's newsletter is like that, I've never
seen it.)

> ... In other words, AMICA or any other organization is not making
> these for profit motive.

Of course not, however it's not unreasonable for them to both cover
costs and add a little to the general fund.

> Should any organization be required or forced to provide a benefit to
> the public?  The answer is _no!_  They may, and it is nice if they do,
> but why should the fruits of labor of some hard working individuals or
> groups benefit those who are not willing to pay for, or help out, in
> those efforts and labors?

Required or forced?  Of course not.  Good business and public
relations?  Yes!  The AMICA is free to charge whatever they want for
whatever they sell, but to exclude a willing buyer?  That makes no
sense.

Many organizations price things for the general market and offer a
discount to members.  Anyone can 'buy the book', but if you're a
member, you get 15% off (or whatever).  Once someone buys a few books,
they realize that they're missing out on that discount and they join.
That's good for the business and good for the customer/member.  On the
other hand, if all they want is the one item, forcing them to buy a
membership just annoys the buyer.

z!
Carl Zwanzig