APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2008-02 > 1201993776


From: "Joan M. Wieser, CG" <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Membership Category Challenge
Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2008 17:09:36 -0600
References: <mailman.89469.1201976593.18604.apg@rootsweb.com>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.89469.1201976593.18604.apg@rootsweb.com>


Dee Dee,
You bring up a scenario that reminds me of the actions of an
organization I became a part of a while ago. The only difference is
that the opposite happened. Instead of dividing, it joined the
categories into one. The same arguments were presented against joining
the categories as are presented here for dividing. Then, as now, those
arguments were, in my opinion, elitist. The focus here seems to be on
the definition of professional as a noun and not an adjective. Maybe
that's the difference between the members. Why does everything and
everyone have to have a label these days? It reminds me of what I
learned in history class many eons ago. "Irish need not apply."

Years ago I learned a great lesson on just this topic and from, of all
things, high school kids. I was leading a group of parents of
instrumental music students. We were trying to form a "band boosters"
club. Once the mission statement and by laws were in place and handed
out for review to the group as a whole, I had calls from parents asking
about levels of membership. It seems there were some who felt they
should be at a higher level because their child sat first chair. I
eventually made the decision to take this to the kids. The result being
those wonderful, funny, talented kids laughed the parents out of the
room! They didn't care if he was more talented or she sat second
chair. They were part of a group doing what they loved. It didn't
change their standards and if anything, it improved their performance!

I'm not so sure this discussion is about clarifying things for the
consumer. Consumers aren't as uneducated as some would like to think.
There is enough information out there that can direct them to find
someone who does quality work. There are also enough protections in
place for them. If they choose not to file a complaint, it could be
because their priorities are different. I doubt I would accept the
excuse of too busy. In my mind and in my geographical area, most
consumers wouldn't choose someone with a ton of credentials anyway
because it would simply cost them too much money.

I also mentioned in a previous post that I had a great mentor. I did
and because of what she did and how she treated me I will pay it
forward. If I can help someone else learn how to search, cite sources,
get organized, tackle a brick wall or try for certification, you can bet
I will and I'll do it free of charge. It seems to me that if this
profession is in its infancy then we should be helping each other to
better ourselves instead of categorizing ourselves.

I guess I'm one of those people who'll take the side of the underdog
everytime if the circumstances are what they seem to be here. It's my
experience that those who speak out about insecurity are usually the
ones who are insecure. In becoming certified I believe that along with
that achievement came the responsibility to help further my field where
I can. That doesn't necessarily mean for monetary gain or to do it
publicly. Maybe those that I help will never have the opportunity to
seek a higher level such as certification, but if I get an email or a
call from someone that shouts of success because I was able to help them
move in the right direction, then I will have fulfilled that
responsibility. Not only will I have fulfilled it, I will have great
personal satisfaction as well. In my book, this is still about
genealogy and will never be about titles or money. I don't fit into any
category and I will never willingly place myself into one. To me, it
limits my growth as a person and shouts to others the level on which I
can build a relationship with them.

The only problem as I see it with your two new categories is that
somebody somewhere has to write a definition of them. That's where your
major problem comes in. In doing that I would bet all 6 of your
challenge questions will be answered.

Joan M. Wieser, CG(SM)

This thread: