I think the result on this poll will be skewed.Members who are not registered with this site or don't have internet will not be able to vote for "hardcopy" option!  I unashamedly vote for (B&W) hardcopy.

What happened to email as an option? I would happily receive an email copy of the newsletter.Wouldn't it be practical to see who would take the newsletter by email / or online and forego the hardcopy. Then you'd reduce the hardcopy count. I suspect that you'd more than halve the hardcopy count.Just a thought. I currently get many newsletters by email. I also find the option more practical.

The options in the survey are to limiting for me to vote the way I would want to.  However I think it is essential to retain the hard copy.  I also like to be able to access the electronic version and see no reason why we cannot have both.  Those of you who care about the future of the Register will no doubt have your own explanations for our current situation but it is relatively recent. (At the AGM 2005 it was reported that the Register "continues to be in a strong financial position with a balance of $5,036 in the cheque account and term deposits of $20,000") There is no reason why this situation cannot be achieved again with good management and careful budgetting.   Malcolm

Alex I would be interested in the details of your “core group”.  Out of say 400 current members how many make up this group?  I think you would be surprised if you were able to accurately assess the feeliings of the wider membership.  In fact I'd ask you to think about your statement from the reverse perspective – is it not a relatively small group who would happily see the hard copy scrapped?  As I have already said in a previous post there needn't be a problem and everyone could have a choice.Malcolm

Fair comment Malcolm.  I remember many meetings and at AGMs where the topic had been brought up. In those open forums people stated that they where quite happy to have more money spent on club activities. The silent majority must have stayed very silent. We never heard any complaints regarding the expenditure. It is a matter of balance, prices have gone up over the last few years and the scale has tipped the wrong way too far. By the looks of this it is going to be addressed now. If you have any suggestions you know who to contact. Nobody wants to see the hard copy scrapped. How can you make such a statement? Who wants the hard copy scrapped? Who says people can't have a choice. By core group I am talking about the Auckland section. I am not going to name the Luddites :-). They have as much right to their opinion as I have to mine. That's all you are getting here, my opinion, not a researched paper.Like I have stated before. I like the newsletter and don't want to see the paper version disappear, while at the same time I am happy to receive an email or online version if it helps to save money.

Alex, here is option 3/ which would start now. You could just include a response form / ad in the newsletter. The response form would basically say.... in the interests of saving trees and money and providing a format that some members want, we're letting members know that they can now receive the newsletter in electronic format. If you would like to do this and not get the hard copy, or get both the electronic copy and the hardcopy please send an email to..... with your membership number etc. (you could also post in but email has the advantage of the recipient being able to accumulate accurate email addresses). One big advantage of the electronic copy is that you could potentially double its size at no cost. This way you could choose electronic and hardcopy, or electronic only or have the status quo remain. Leave the response form / ad in the newsletter each month and put a little counter with the numbers that have gone electronic etc. (For those of us that are curious). I wouldn't expect the newsletter cost to be cheap. I have no need for a hard copy.Lastly how do advertisers feel about the change.