I very much appreciate the vast deal of work that section officers do. It is indeed important to recognise that this is voluntary work, and volunteers generally do their best work when they’re given as much freedom and autonomy as possible. The BAA sections operate in very different ways, and I agree with Nick that this inevitable – not least because many collaborate with external organisations in very different ways.
But I think the question of why many observers don’t submit images to the BAA sections is an important one, and it’s a pity to imply that it’s because observers can’t be bothered. Meaning no disrespect to the sections, I suspect observers who don’t submit their work probably aren’t actually that interested in doing so. I don’t think the BAA has ever tried to collect evidence as to the reasons, and I can only base my speculation on guesswork.
In the past I’ve heard these people dismissed as somehow ‘now serious observers’. But as Nick says, many of the world’s leading imagers don’t submit images. Browsing online astrophotography galleries, or the finalists of astrophotography competitions, how many of the names are BAA members – even among folks who clearly have a great deal of talent (and kit)? I suspect people who submit observations to the BAA are a minority, even among very serious observers.
So, what are these people doing, if not submitting to BAA sections? A lot of observers are motivated by wanting to build a social media following. Others are clearly motivated by trying to monetise their images (though I wonder how many are successful). Others are over the moon if they get 100 likes on Facebook.
To use some trendy lingo, I think if the BAA wants to maximise engagement from observers, it needs to provide a user experience that members find fulfilling. It needs to build a positive relationship with observers, not seem to chastise them. The solar and comet sections have been pioneers in making their section archives browsable online, and Nick and Peter Meadows deserve a lot of credit for this. I would imagine (once again, with no evidence) observers find it far more satisfying contributing to an archive they can see online.
My conscious aim when I set up the member albums (almost a decade ago now!) was to try to replicate as much of the social media experience that people clearly crave, within the BAA community. I agree with James that this could have been integrated with the work of the sections to a much greater degree – I suspect to everybody’s mutual benefit – but for various reasons it didn’t happen.
The galleries are consciously designed to be as accessible as possible to the BAA sections – for example, the search-by-object-type categories are aligned with the BAA sections. And although a restrictive file size limit was initially in place, I think the current limit is larger than what can reasonably be attached to an email.
Dominic