PlayersBoycott

Alert!

Sunday, May 24, 2009

Donations

As you all know we are 100% volunteer here at HANA. Our marketing budget consists of, well, nothing. What little we have raised through pin sales has been awesome, and will hopefully cover expenses for web hosting and things like that. However, we opened the mailbox recently and found a sizeable donation. It was from a long time horseplayer who wants to see the game change. Attached was a note, and we reprint it here, unedited.

If you would like to help us out, we certainly would appreciate it. If you donate at least twenty bucks, we send you a charter member pin. You can do that right here. To all of you who have helped us by donating, buying a pin, or grabbing some apparel at our store, we thank you very much for all of your support.

Rich's Letter. Thanks Rich. Please click to enlarge.



8 comments:

Anonymous said...

I like Rich's idea, just donate one $2 bet to HANA each month, $24 covers you for the whole upcoming year.

We have 1100 members. If only half of us would just do that, one single measely $2 bet a month -- HANA would have a budget and the resources to make some real noise. HANA is limited only by our support, or lack thereof.

My $24 is on the way...

Recovering political scientist said...

Some charities/college alumni funds offer the ability to donate every month via credit card. If HANA could offer that I think alot of people would be willing to do $2-$5 per month rather writing a check for $50 one time. I realize receiving credit cards might be a pain in the neck for HANA, but possibly worth it.

Indulto said...

In his letter, Mr. Bauer wrote, "... I think it's important that membership information be complete as to names and mailing addresses," but he does not explain why. Later he wondered whether the HANA website would be accessible to members through "logins authenticated as to usernames and passwords." Again he did not explain the intended purpose/benefit of such access.

I would support the idea of all HANA members being able to interact with one another both publicly and privately in the same way those who are also PaceAdvantage forum members do, although only pseudonyms and e-mail addresses are required to participate there, and which was all that was initially required to join HANA.

Certanly some additional and stable funding would permit HANA to install the same or similar discussion forum software that is now relatively inexpensive if technical expertise to maintain and operate it is available in-house. I'd gladly contribute the suggested $24 annually, but I'm not aware of any existing procedure allowing such transactions when one uses a pseudonym.

Apparently there is still reluctance among others as well to disclose their name over the internet or there would be fewer blog comments submitted anonymously or with a pseudonym. I've also noticed that the HANA blog does not usually fully identify its members when crediting them as an information or opinion source.

Mr. Bauer's insistence on a "face-to-face" social protocol was reasonable prior to the internet when players seldom communicated regulary with others who did not attend the same track or OTB location. Must every HANA member reveal his/her identity over the internet to people he/she may never meet in person -- or even engage on-line -- in order to participate in collective action including taking a position on issues? Can they be certain their personal information will remain safe from prying eyes, and that they will not subsequently be subjected to threatening or annoying behavior?

Perhaps modifying an existing precedent is not something to be decided by HANA leadership alone, but voted on by the entire membership even assuming that a majority may have already provided accurate information.

HANA exists because the racing industry has failed to listen to its customers and treat them with respect. HANA must not make that same mistake with its members.

Richard Bauer said...

Mr/Mrs/Miss Indulto does not want to identify who he/she/it is. That is Mr/Mrs/Miss Indulto's prerogative. Mr/Mrs/Miss Indulto is the only person at HANA to my knowledge who insists on remaining anonymous and from my perspective that's OK. I don't have to justify anything to Mr/Mrs/Miss Indulto, and I won't attempt to.

Indulto said...

Mr. Bauer's failure to engage in dialogue with me is nothing new.

In his letter, he stated that he "opted to stay in the background" despite what I agree were his laudable efforts in support of racing reform in th past. How, then, would he have access to HANA sign-up information? Is his "knowledge" based on fact?

Mr. Bauer may not know of any others who did not provide their name and address because he doesn't wish to. He rebuffed my attempt months ago to communicate with him regarding the possibility of buiding on his work at "trackthieves," noting that his policy was not to engage in discussion with anyone whose name he didn't know. That is HIS prerogative, but it's not OK with me for someone who now wishes to impose upon others his own standards that were specifically rejected in the originally published HANA Mission Statement.

HANA now has a wider membership that is -- or should be -- able to alter its mission and procedures if so desired. Thus that battle can still be won by those who believe that who they are/were is more important than what they have to say.

Some members are gregarious and indeed make pleasant company when the opportunity arises to get to know them better. Sadly, the internet is not yet the vehicle to support all such relationships comfortably under all circumstances, especially across the numbers HANA expects to eventually involve.

The question can then become, "Who don't you know that knows (about) you?" If you're not a celebrity -- or someone for whom visibilty brings business opportunities or some other benefit -- and you're unlikely to attend sponsored social gatherings, why expose yourself to the risks still associated with internet participation that is beyond HANA's control?

I support HANA's overall objctives and hope the details will remain as compelling once they are available. I appreciate the volunteer efforts by some active subset of its membership as well as Mr. Bauer's apparently generous donation that HANA was prepared to accept. There will be some who disagree with my priorities as well as those for whom the journey is more important than the results. It seems inappropriate, however, to exclude anyone who wishes to participate within their comfort zone and/or prefers to concentrate on collective action leading to results.

Anonymous said...

Some members are gregarious and indeed make pleasant company when the opportunity arises to get to know them better. Sadly, the internet is not yet the vehicle to support all such relationships comfortably under all circumstances, especially across the numbers HANA expects to eventually involve.

"The question can then become, "Who don't you know that knows (about) you?" If you're not a celebrity -- or someone for whom visibilty brings business opportunities or some other benefit -- and you're unlikely to attend sponsored social gatherings, why expose yourself to the risks still associated with internet participation that is beyond HANA's control?"

If you don't want anyone to know who you are, don't tell anyone. What that has to do with joining HANA, I have no idea. When you sign up for HANA, they don't ask you what your favorite online avatar name is. And they don't make you wear a name tag around that tells everyone your real name.

I think they require your real name, as opposed to a virtual online avatar, because they are real group, not a virtual online avatar of a group.

I joined HANA, I've donated money to HANA, I've traded a bunch of emails with HANA folks.

Do you know who I am? Didn't think so.

Richard Bauer said...

Mr/Mrs/MIss Indulto remarked, concerning my letter, "In his letter, he stated that he "opted to stay in the background" despite what I agree were his laudable efforts in support of racing reform in th past. How, then, would he have access to HANA sign-up information? Is his "knowledge" based on fact?"

I have no idea what Mr/Mrs/Miss Indulto is referring to. The only person that I KNOW signed up with HANA is myself. Frankly, I don't recall what information I provided when I did sign up; and, my only refernce to signup information had to do with the HANA signup form that is now present on its website. If I knew the answers to the questions that I raised in my letter, I would not have raised them. Mr/Mrs/Miss Indulto is the one making the issue about his/her/its identity; not me.

Indulto said...

I see that Mr. Bauer has apparently acknowledged that indeed he has no certain knowledge as to how many HANA members have signed up without providing their name and address. That is as it should be.

I have no problem with his unwillingness to justify to me, personally, why he wants HANA to collect the names and addresses of those who have not already provided them, but if his request has any merit -- and he felt it was important enough to mention in his letter -- why is he now reluctant to share his motivation with the entire membership?