Commited to MAC?
- Thread starter Ad van Tage
- Start date
QUERY#1:Ad van Tage":3nmckwdb said:
On http://aquariumcouncil.org/subpage.asp? ... §ion=3
MAC":3nmckwdb said:
Is that correct?
For instance on http://www.aquariumcouncil.org/subpage. ... 3#american
we read an undated statement that
NO indication is given what "recent" might mean...
As we have seen via Tom HEEEGER, things DO change!
Can anyone comment? Does anyone care to?
MaryHM has already made a comment in a different tread
about the Philippine Tropical Fish Exporters Association (PTFEA)
clarionreef
Advanced Reefer
- Location
- San Francisco
Committed to MAC?
Well years after signing a 'pledge' to be committed to the MAC movement, is it not telling to regard how few actually took the next step?
For starters 98% of the entire ASIAN exporter community!
No one in Indonesia [including Bali],
and now no one in the Philippines except for the head of the exporters assn. [ Aquascapes] and her secretary...[HD Marineworld]
.and the publicly disenchanted Aquarium Habitat.
Thats it? No one else? How bout the exporters assn. vice president? The rest of the BOD? The other 20 or so exporters? Any of the dozens in Indo?
Looks to me like the business world holds MAC in pretty low regard if they don't really care to follow up on the empty pledges they made.
AT least a few more million dollar outfits should have joined for the pure P.R. value like a few Americans did!
But no....they did not join, follow up or get certified.
In other words...in the source countries themselves...this group is apparently not well regarded at all.
Sincerely, Steve
Well years after signing a 'pledge' to be committed to the MAC movement, is it not telling to regard how few actually took the next step?
For starters 98% of the entire ASIAN exporter community!
No one in Indonesia [including Bali],
and now no one in the Philippines except for the head of the exporters assn. [ Aquascapes] and her secretary...[HD Marineworld]
.and the publicly disenchanted Aquarium Habitat.
Thats it? No one else? How bout the exporters assn. vice president? The rest of the BOD? The other 20 or so exporters? Any of the dozens in Indo?
Looks to me like the business world holds MAC in pretty low regard if they don't really care to follow up on the empty pledges they made.
AT least a few more million dollar outfits should have joined for the pure P.R. value like a few Americans did!
But no....they did not join, follow up or get certified.
In other words...in the source countries themselves...this group is apparently not well regarded at all.
Sincerely, Steve
clarionreef
Advanced Reefer
- Location
- San Francisco
Jenn,
Like many things in many websites...ours has some updating to do.
There has been no official position for several years but we have had a resignation from the vice president over this matter. He wanted us to 'validate' MAC and we thought it best to let that be determined by achievement and results.
My own disenchantment with this group of outsiders comes from their record of non engaging in the field and understanding that they are not set up to work the field where the fish and the fisherman are. This leaves them with only non field activities....save a few token ones.
To forge ahead without reference to professional work in the villages they are by definition a very different group then what they claim to be.
I have since come to learn what their true mission is and I assure you it is not the same as ours.
They are simply a funder inspired pilot project to test the concept of certification as a method of manipulating consumer behavior. This notion has received a very tepid reception in food fish marketing and now a much cooler reception in our trade...especially from exporters in Indonesia and the Philippines.
The mismanagement of this marketing approach has clearly alienated the trades own reform wing and despite several million dollars of effort and years of time has continued with a marked lack of result.
AMDA is much more interested in an aquarium trade derived solution and is focusing on a different scenario.
Our own representative to MAC is up for renewal and we have many things to discuss at the next BOD meeting.
Sincerely, Steve
Like many things in many websites...ours has some updating to do.
There has been no official position for several years but we have had a resignation from the vice president over this matter. He wanted us to 'validate' MAC and we thought it best to let that be determined by achievement and results.
My own disenchantment with this group of outsiders comes from their record of non engaging in the field and understanding that they are not set up to work the field where the fish and the fisherman are. This leaves them with only non field activities....save a few token ones.
To forge ahead without reference to professional work in the villages they are by definition a very different group then what they claim to be.
I have since come to learn what their true mission is and I assure you it is not the same as ours.
They are simply a funder inspired pilot project to test the concept of certification as a method of manipulating consumer behavior. This notion has received a very tepid reception in food fish marketing and now a much cooler reception in our trade...especially from exporters in Indonesia and the Philippines.
The mismanagement of this marketing approach has clearly alienated the trades own reform wing and despite several million dollars of effort and years of time has continued with a marked lack of result.
AMDA is much more interested in an aquarium trade derived solution and is focusing on a different scenario.
Our own representative to MAC is up for renewal and we have many things to discuss at the next BOD meeting.
Sincerely, Steve
Thanks for that clarification.
If I may suggest, it might be a wise idea to update the AMDA website - and to contact MAC and ask to have AMDA's name removed from the website at least until such time as an 'official' stance can be agreed upon.
I'd respectfully suggest the same of any company whose name appears on the MAC website, who may have changed their position... (Mary?).
Seems to me that if those who have changed their minds, were removed from the list, that list would be a heck of a lot shorter...
Jenn
If I may suggest, it might be a wise idea to update the AMDA website - and to contact MAC and ask to have AMDA's name removed from the website at least until such time as an 'official' stance can be agreed upon.
I'd respectfully suggest the same of any company whose name appears on the MAC website, who may have changed their position... (Mary?).
Seems to me that if those who have changed their minds, were removed from the list, that list would be a heck of a lot shorter...
Jenn
I almost had them pull my name a few years ago, but here's what I've found. About once every 2-3 months someone will contact me, having seen my name on that list. They want to know when I'll be MAC certified. I tell them. :twisted: Now let's see if they pull my name off...
clarionreef
Advanced Reefer
- Location
- San Francisco
Yes Mom,
But after I clean my room.
I'll put it to the BOD but they'll probably want to leave it as it is to give MAC still another chance.
Almost all thinking on this stuff is now more political than heartfelt.I mean of the three exporters in Manila...none of them "believe" in MAC anymore....but, they stay on for political reasons.
A leading exporter told me that the slowness and 'year in year out' non performance of MAC is "what hes counting on".
Like you, I believe in taking this seriously and being straight forward. But, as OUR BOD operates like a Democracy, I do not always get my way.
Steve
PS. Better a 'reform looney' than a 'MAC mooney,' don't you think.
But after I clean my room.
I'll put it to the BOD but they'll probably want to leave it as it is to give MAC still another chance.
Almost all thinking on this stuff is now more political than heartfelt.I mean of the three exporters in Manila...none of them "believe" in MAC anymore....but, they stay on for political reasons.
A leading exporter told me that the slowness and 'year in year out' non performance of MAC is "what hes counting on".
Like you, I believe in taking this seriously and being straight forward. But, as OUR BOD operates like a Democracy, I do not always get my way.
Steve
PS. Better a 'reform looney' than a 'MAC mooney,' don't you think.
Heh well I can certainly see both sides of the political coin. Too bad that not everybody has the cajones to dare to speak the truth.
I know of folks that have persued certification simply from a "good PR" standpoint -- I can understand that too, to a point, but if the reality of MAC's "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" actions ever comes to light in a big way, those who bought into it are going to look like either a part of the problem, or the Emperor sans clothes...
I have a hunch that there are quite a number of people counting on the non-performance of MAC to further their various agendas. Nice work if you can get it...
Better a "reform looney" than a "Reeform looney" too!
You have to be looney to be in this business, period
Guilty as charged.
Jenn
I know of folks that have persued certification simply from a "good PR" standpoint -- I can understand that too, to a point, but if the reality of MAC's "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" actions ever comes to light in a big way, those who bought into it are going to look like either a part of the problem, or the Emperor sans clothes...
I have a hunch that there are quite a number of people counting on the non-performance of MAC to further their various agendas. Nice work if you can get it...
Better a "reform looney" than a "Reeform looney" too!
You have to be looney to be in this business, period
Guilty as charged.Jenn
Sardonic Wit":3utjtzjy said:
Forgive me if I have missed something here Sardonit Wit, but isn't "representative to MAC" a slightly different thing than "Member of the Board of DIRECTORS"?
It would be unethical for a person who is "to" an organisation , to speak "for" that organisation. Generally such a representative reports back only to his/her organisation.
You have to be "in or on" an organisation to speak for said organisation.
This may seem like nitpicking to you, but the only person I have seen sign off with "MAC" here is John_Brandt,
who uses "MAC (Board of Directors)" here. Whether he actually speaks for MAC, or for John_Brandt remains a mystery!!!
[See other thread.]
Now I would love to be able to ask a few more questions about WHO IS WHO at MAC, to MAC, from MAC
and the rest of the alphabet soup... but GUYS and GALS it is already 3 AM at the Eastcoast!!!
Can't have any pumkins in the house this early in the year!
So long,
till we inforum again!
Ad van Tage":v5elged7 said:
Nope. In this case rep=board member. Samey-same.
Here is a list of all the board members of the MAC.
http://macweb.inets.com/subpage.asp?page=30§ion=12
AMDA (of which Steve Robinson is prez and Dizzy is a regional officer) has a board member of equal stature to John Brandt on the 'MAC board of Directors', Mr. Randy Goodlett.
So why does Steve and the AMDA folks need John Brandt to show up to answer questions that should be better asked to their very own organazition's person on the MAC board? How about some public information about MAC from the AMDA-MAC BOD person, hmmm?
Hope this little semantics lesson has been of assistance, Advantagious one.
SD
Miss/Mrs/ Mr? Ad,
It was the previous AMDA BOD that voted to endorse MAC. As I mentioned sometime previously, the BOD did not poll the membership at large before making this important decision. The unanimous part is news to me. If memory serves, the minutes from that meeting were never made available to the membership. It was a very contentious time indeed. I do remember e-mailing Paul Holthus and informing him that the endorsement did not necessarily reflect the feelings of the members at large. For MAC to suggest that there was complete harmony and agreement amoung the AMDA BOD would probably serve as another example of how MAC sometimes uses half-truths if they think it will further their cause. Perhaps former BOD member Mary Middlebrook can shed a little light on the subject. Wasn't there a missing clause or something that was supposed to go with it.
Mitch
It was the previous AMDA BOD that voted to endorse MAC. As I mentioned sometime previously, the BOD did not poll the membership at large before making this important decision. The unanimous part is news to me. If memory serves, the minutes from that meeting were never made available to the membership. It was a very contentious time indeed. I do remember e-mailing Paul Holthus and informing him that the endorsement did not necessarily reflect the feelings of the members at large. For MAC to suggest that there was complete harmony and agreement amoung the AMDA BOD would probably serve as another example of how MAC sometimes uses half-truths if they think it will further their cause. Perhaps former BOD member Mary Middlebrook can shed a little light on the subject. Wasn't there a missing clause or something that was supposed to go with it.
Mitch
QUERY#2:Ad van Tage":16u725d0 said:
Is the MAC still active???
Given that we can read on the MAC website that
www.aquariumcouncil.org":16u725d0 said:
has anything happened in the past 5 months?
E-mail goes un-answered, and webnews is badly out of date...
What should one think???
Speaking as the very first AMDA representative to the MAC (personally asked to take the position by none other than Mr. Paul Holthus- aren't I impressive??!!!), here's what happened. I started catching MAC in a string of, shall we say, misrepresentations. I also started not getting any answers to very important questions. I informed the AMDA board of this problem. MAC told AMDA that they wanted a written, signed letter of committment from AMDA to MAC. I said that in light of the recent problems with MAC that I thought it was a bad idea. Because the entire AMDA membership had been privy to many of the problems I was encountering with MAC (via the AMDA email list), I suggested that the AMDA board take it to the membership to vote on- that it was waaaaaaaaaay to important of a decision to make without the membership's permission. I was told in no uncertain terms that the membership would absoultely not be contacted about this decision. At that point I resigned from AMDA and MAC. If I remember correctly, there were people in the BOD that were against it and people that were for it. And then there were people who didn't have the guts to do their job as board members and make a decision, so they politely abstained so as not to hurt anyone's wittle feelings. So the idiots who wanted to back MAC- even though they knew all of the pending problems- won. The AMDA membership pitched a fit, and the lame-ass board of directors came out with some statement about how the letter of committment reflected views of only the board members. PUH-LEAZE!! That's why you elect board members, to make decisions concerning the organization as a whole, not just for the 9 or so people on the BOD. The whole thing was immensely lame and stupid and was carried out in a very underhanded way. The heavy MAC supporters on the AMDA board knew the membership would not support a letter of committment to MAC, so they went around their own members. Disgusting.
Sincerely,
Mary Middlebrook
Former MAC Board of Director
Former AMDA Board of Director
Former MASNA Board of Director
Currently disillusioned with the whole mess
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
