Bill, Here are the answers to your questions. 1. Why are we giving more money to Fathom to add the same features we had under the old web site and should have been part of their original work? The general principle, agreed on by us and Fathom, is that features on the old site will be carried over the new site. They have never disputed that. However, this can sometimes be a gray area because the new site works differently than the old site because of the local content control system. Transitioning from one technology to another is not always a one to one correlation. 2. How much extra are we now being asked to pay for the data downloads that SMs and ODV used to get under the old web site? There would be no charge to simply add the previous report functionality. We want to implement an improved report generator and we have been working with Fathom to determine exactly how to implement this. An expanded and improved report generator would provide a more uniform interface to the users and simplify site maintenance. The expanded version of the Report Generator will cost between $10K and $15K depending on the features that we want to add such as users having the ability to choose the fields they want and the format of the report. 3. Why wasn't this done under the original proposal agreement? See above. We probably should have specified the report function more precisely, but we did not. 4. What other features did we have on the old site that we need and used, and are not available on the new site? The features that are still missing are detailed in the report that I sent the Board on Saturday. The previous site evolved over 15 years and contained many functions. Because of the size of the site, there may still be some features that may not be working correctly, but I believe that we have captured them and we are correcting the majority of the problems. 5. We're over budget, way past the completion dates, still having problems with the new site AND still being asked to send more money to Fathom. We are not over budget with payments to Fathom with regard to payments due them on the original agreement. In fact, we still are withholding a small amount of money (approx $4200) from the original project budget from them. Barry did an analysis of the time and effort Web project for you previously. Some new questions that come to mind: 6. Your items 5 and 15 report generator and expanded RSS audio feeds is dependent upon a new agreement/contract with Fathom for additional work. Has A&F or the EC approved the expenditure of additional funds to Fathom, if not, under whose authority would those funds be released? I discussed this with Jim Fenstermaker and the A & F Committee that we anticipated some follow on work with Fathom. We will need to have some continuing relationship with Fathom until our IT Department has the time and expertise to do all the work on the Site ourselves. The new agreement, that Chris Imlay is helping me with, will specify the terms and conditions of our overall business relationship with Fathom. Individual projects will be added to the master agreement as required and approved. Because of the sensitivity of our relationship with Fathom, I discuss any expenditure with Dave and for any large expenditure, I would let Jim Fenstermaker know about it. Additional work to date beyond the original contract has been less than $500. This was for two additions to the Contact Form : http://www.arrl.org/contact-arrl 1. A Subject field 2. A Broken Links category. These were not in the original specs for the contact form. 7. Several weeks ago, I found I no longer had access to download files within ODV. I sent a note to Dave K1ZZ and access was restored the following day. Early last week, I tried to get a list of clubs within the WPA Section on the Search for ARRL Affiliated Clubs in public side of the website and was presented with a list of the first 8 clubs within WPA. Upon selecting "next" for the next 8 clubs, the search was lost and I was given page 2 for 2196 clubs. I passed that information to Katie who acknowledged the search list was not operating properly and she would see about getting it fixed. To date, it still isn't fixed and I haven't been told when it might be fixed. It would be nice to know what bugs or problems we are still seeing with the website. Perhaps a listing from Bugzilla posted on ODV? I am sorry about the Club query form. The second page worked previously but Fathom has been working on the Club data along with Jon's staff so something must have broken while they were working on it. We have put in a priority request with Fathom this morning again to get it fixed. I don't think that Bugzilla would be the best way to do this since it is really a browser based IT tool. I will continue to provide regular updates and other updates of importance as they occur. 8. Item 11 - Make Interactive Forums Operational. I'd rather see features/functions of the old website put in place before we do any additional work on making new features work and I know my members and volunteers within the Atlantic Division feel the same way. Our highest priorities are restoring the functionality of the Web Site and revenue related improvements. Among the lower priority items, some are easier and less time consuming than others. The Forum capability has been a part of the Content Management System since launch and will take relatively little time to implement this feature after the higher priority items are resolved. 9. Item 15 - Expanded RSS Audio Feeds. Same is my item 8. This is the same situation as the Report generator. We are trying to develop a feature that can be used across all content pages, not just a hard code on a single page. We never anticipated the demand for RSS feeds across the site when we started two years ago, but it is now a more common Web feature and we want to make it available across all content pages. 73, Harold Harold Kramer, WJ1B Chief Operating Officer ARRL -the national association for Amateur Radio 225 Main Street Newington, CT 06111 (860) 594 -0220