Simon L6 wrote:I don't think 'Data Protection' is an excuse in this instance. I think it's a case of the National Office thinking 'what we have we hold'.
Of course this all presumes that the data is up to date. It isn't, as anybody who has tried to e-mail DA secretaries will know. We've been strenuous in the updating of our records, and keeping National Office informed and I doubt that the blank Annual Return has been sent to the right address more than once in five years. My recent round-robin e-mail to the DA contact addresses listed by National Office got a bunch of returns from non-existent e-mail addresses.
And Arvato do not apply themselves to gathering e-mail addresses - there is still a substantial slice of our membership roll that does not show an e-mail address. No DA can afford to post letters to members time and time again, and it really is incumbent on Arvato to get e-mail addresses from renewing members.
When I set up the Cambridge DA Website many years ago, I rented webspace with a "Host" and Officer's who needed email addresses were given an address. This was forwarded to their own email address. When the Officer changed it was forwarded to the new officer's address. In this way we have our own domain with addresses on that domain. But remember that there is a large minority in CTC that do not use computers.
Posting letters to members is an expensive way to go, many Groups do not have the funds for that. If that method of communication is decided on then maybe we need to have a much greater percentage of the subscription forwarded to local member groups (Capitation Grant). I have just posted a card to my cousin in the USA - 90p, I think he will get an email card next year.