> During our committee meeting this morning, it was decided to close the
RUG.
> Now I understand that I'm new in getting involved, and that the other
> committee members have been in it for awhile.  But it just feels so wrong
to
> give in and pack it up.  There has got to be a way to get the local HP
> community excited, again.

I'm not sure that RUG interest and HP community excitement are necessarily
correlated.

A couple of us were talking about this topic last week, and we both felt
that the main reason that RUGs seem to be fading is that their primary
reason for having been created in the first place has, to a great extent,
been supplanted. In fact, you're looking at one of the main "culprits" right
now: the Internet, improved user-to-user and user-to-provider communication,
and support channels like hp3000-l.

One of the primary motivations (OK, *the* primary motivation in most cases)
for the creation of product user groups like RUGs was peer-to-peer
assistance: swapping war stories, helping new users get up to speed,
providing a forum for experienced users to share their hard-won knowledge
with others, and providing a (semi-)focussed point for feedback to the
provider. In the early days, there simply was no viable channel for users to
obtain that kind of knowledge-transfer and emotional support (hey, in those
days we frequently needed the latter more than the former!); you might find
a good BBS on your product, but you might not. So user groups were created.
They gave users at all levels a chance to get together and commiserate,
expostulate, and cross-pollinate with their peers.

A secondary motivation was to obtain "power in numbers" when dealing with
the provider. By presenting a united front backed by dozens of users, the
bargaining power of the group in obtaining changes, fixes, and service was
improved over what each could obtain as an individual.

Of course, there are the social aspects as well, but they are not really
related to the RUG-ness of the group, beyond the usual issue of bringing
together people with similar interests. That, by itself, is probably not
enough to form the basis of a long-term relationship.

So here come channels like electronic mail, Usenet, mailing lists, Web
sites, and similar media. They provide most or all of the same peer-to-peer
and user-to-provider interaction capabilities of a RUG (except, of course,
for the opportunity have that interaction in person; that is certainly an
important issue, and we may be going too far on the road away from the
"front porch community" thing, but again it is not necessarily a core issue
for RUG-ness). The difference is that the electronic channels provide the
support/interaction/commiseration opportunities at your convenience, from
the location of your choosing, and as often as you want them. Can the RUG
concept compete?

Steve