We would like to cut back the number of (paper) newsletters we mail via U.S. post to lower the amount of paper required, thereby reducing our overall costs and the newsletter's environmental impact. In addition, a component in processing the paper version can be slow and non-responsive, negatively impacting our target print/mail dates.
Regarding costs, it makes sense to rely more on the online version but we want to make sure our members agree. We would appreciate your feedback on how we can make the electronic version of the newsletter the more attractive method of receiving newsletters. What do you like or not like about the electronic (email) version that we may be able to address or improve? Why would you prefer to receive a hard (paper) copy rather than the online version?
Some of the benefits of the online version include:
1. A contents (bookmark) panel where each item is a link to its article that, when clicked on, takes you directly to the article.
2. All photographs are in color.
3. All references to web pages or Email address are hot and, if clicked on, will be activated.
4. More articles due to less restriction to newsletter size.
5. Online pages can be designed to show an entire page at a time, reducing the need to scroll up or down.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Proposal to Reduce Paper Mailing for Newsletter
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I'd prefer an online version. I already get the state newspaper as a PDF, and having an HTML formatted newsletter would be even better.
I like the idea of publishing an HTML version of the Newsletter for the Web because it will load faster and does not require that Adobe Reader be installed on your machine. Also, as Rik had said in an email to me, security is better with an HTML version. The problem is in automatically generating a side panel like in a PDF with bookmarks to each article in the newsletter. It can be done manually at publishing time but for a large newsletter this can be time consuming. I am going to work the issue.
There is now an online HTML version of the Sedona-Verde Valley Newsletter. Go to our web site and directly under the image for the PDF version of the newsletter (bottom of left panel) there is a link "HTML Version", just click on that link. Please make any comments regarding your experience using the HTML version.
So why if we want to cut down on mailings and junk mail was our postage permit used to mail a political flyer for a slate of Sedona fire board candidates. Not only are these candidates themselves toxic in nature, the flyer they sent out slams and insults our local firefighters. The Sierra Club's own name is tarnished by seeming to align ourselves with these distasteful individuals.
Dear Anonymous,
The Sierra Club Sedona Verde Valley group does not have its own postal permit for bulk mailing. It is way too expensive, so to keep costs down we contract with a private company to handle our bulk mailing and they use their own postal permit. The political mailings you make reference to were not mailed by our Sierra Club group. Not sure how you came to your conclusion because most postal permits I have seen do not reference the group using the permit.
I too, heard that bulk permit number 100 that was used to mail out a slanderous flyer targeting local union firefighters, belonged to the Sedona / Verde Valley Sierra Club. Is this really true? If so, I am ashamed of the organization that promotes a decrease in paper usage and overall earth well-being. I also would be very disgusted that such an organization would align themselves with individuals that have such skewed ideas and agendas. I hope this is in fact false.
Did you not read or understand my post just before yours?? NO the permit is not ours!! The one you reference may belong to some private company that anyone can contract with to perform bulk mailing. What part of the previous post do you not understand. How can I make it any clearer?
Dear Admin,
I understand completely. However, even if it is not your permit number, how can your organization align themselves with a provider that directly conflicts your message of "proposing to reduce paper mailing for newsletter"? Here is the link that directly ties your organization with the garbage that was recently sent out trashing union firefighters and slinging mud all across Sedona. I am ashamed your organization would affiliate themselves with such individuals and groups. Guess it really goes to show you cannot trust anyone’s word or message these days, doesn't it? Follow the link below to the second page left-hand side.
http://www.arizona.sierraclub.org/sedona/newsletter/currentnewsletter.pdf
Sorry here is the correct link.
http://www.arizona.sierraclub.org/sedona/newsletter/currentnewsletter.pdf
Guess I have to ype it in manually.
http://www.arizona.sierraclub.org/
sedona/newsletter/
currentnewsletter.pdf
From the looks of it, Craig Dible is an active member of your organization. It also happens that he is an active member contributing money, time and leg work into the campaign for the individuals that sent out the saturation mailing. Can you explain this? If you would like, I can reference the Yavapai County elections department that shows his name all over their campaign finance reports. I am going to pass this information on to the national Sierra Club chair and see what information they may be able to provide. If my feelings are accurate and you willingly authorized the use of a bulk mailing permit for a saturation mail out, while beating the drum to stop the wasteful use of paper, I feel we will find no bigger hypocrite than your local organization. Have a nice day and I cannot wait for an explanation.
Post a Comment