[Terry Bond]

Congratulations to all who received recognition for their hard work during the past year. Region and Chapter Web Sites are getting better all the time! To let you all know how it works and what we look for, here is a rather lengthy but important post -

first, each site linked to the AACA National site is evaluated by the AACA Internet Committee. The review is a year-long process that includes many site visits by committee members to evaluate them. Here are some of the areas we consider to be important:
- Functionality and ease of use
- Originality and creativity
- Presentation, graphics, design and appeal
- Content including a calendar of events, promotion of activities, promotion of AACA, articles, activity reports, photos, club info, etc.
- Timeliness of content and currency of info.
- Interest to the membership and prospective members.
- Value to the membership and prospective members.
- Is the Webmaster clearly identified and able to be contacted?
- Are the officers of the club identified and able to be contacted?

In short, a good web site mirrors a good newsletter. It must be current, active, and of considerable value in serving the membership, encouraging participation and must also serve as a recruiting tool for prospective members.

You don't need to register in advance to participate in the review process.

Everyone receiving an award of Excellence, Distinction or Merit received a special logo that can be displayed on the web site. I will be posting a complete list of winners in the next day or so, but take the time to look at the many wonderful sites linked to the National AACA page and you'll get plenty of ideas.

Terry Bond
Chairman, Internet Committee

[Terry Bond]

Ive been asked for some additionl detail on what the difference between the award levels is. We are evaluating the sites based on the criteria described above in this section. What ends up separating the awards is the following:

*Merit* - adequate. Meets the basic requirements. Clearly identifies the region/chapter and includes such important features as downloadable membershp application and contact information. Has good value to the region/chapter and supports the membership and recruitment objectives. Promotes events, provides sufficient info to facilitate participation. Is an interesting site that adequately describes the club, what they do, and how to participate. Supports National AACA. Is active and current.
*Distinction* - a very good to excellent site meeting all basic requirements detailed above. Has considerable value to the region/chapter and supports the membershp and recruitment objectives by actively encouraging participation. Reports on activities to encourage participation. Supports the hobby in a broader perspective and offers features and services beyond what is normally found in just a "bill-board" type of website. Is active and current.
*Excellence - *An outstandng site that is graphically appealing, navigatges extremely well, is active and does an outstanding job supporting the region/chapter and supports the membership and recruitment objectives. Offers outstanding reporting and promition of activities, encourages participation, offers features not normally found in "bill-board" style websites. Is always active and current and makes you want to visit again and again. Supportive of AACA's objectives and encourages participation on a broader scale. An exemplary site that you would refer others to as an example of "the best."

I always evaluate a site as though I were new to the area and looking for a club to join. What would make me want to do that? Is the info there going to make it easy for me to participate in some activities? Is it easy to contact people? Do I feel welcome? Sites also need to clearly identify themselves with a region or chapter logo and the AACA logo. A link to National AACA is critical as is the ability to download a membership application and find out how to become a member. Nothing about the site should be outdated, insufficient, or difficult.

Hope this helps understand the difference.
Terry

[John_L_Walker]

Hello All Website Editors, I am taking over for Terry Bond for 2007 and we are not going to change the way the websites have veen evaluated. Keep up the great work and our committee is exited to veiw all your wonderful work.

[wyo218]

John,

Please advise the procedure for changing webmasters.
I will be taking over for Barbara Chamberlain at Peace River Region.

She says I will need a password. Please send info to me at wyowill@juno.com

Thanks,

Roger Will

[R W Burgess]

Roger, I emailed PeterG, our webmaster. He will contact you here or at your e-mail address. His instructions are painless and quick.

Welcome to the AACA Webmasters Group, you're a valuable part of the organization.

Wayne

[boblove]

I am wondering if the criteria, the evaluators or some other factor was changed for the evaluation of the 2007 web sites? It seems something had changed! Our club site has received the Award of Excellence since 2003 (4 straight years), and subsequently, the Master Webmaster Award; then this year, we received an award of "Merit"! For certain, the site had not basically changed except for some better graphics or layouts and had more content! I and most of my fellow club members feel it has only improved over the last five years! Our club members are asking what pulled the site down to the status of "Honorable Mention"? I have no explanation for them. I do the website out of love of the hobby and to be a service for the club; to present our club and the hobby to the general public in a light that will encourage more people to see what we are all about. I do not do it for awards (though the accolades are appreciated), I do it because I consider it another fun part of my love of old cars. Do we need a NAAP for webmasters? Or do I need to put more flashy designs, or bells & whistles, or anecdotes, funny stories, etc., etc.? That is not representative of what this hobby is about! Our love of these classic, antique or classic cars should be our central driving force and should be what we present to the world!
Thank you.

[Dr. Strangelove]

I agree with 'boblove'. Our regions web site was also 'downgraded' when in fact it contained more content, more pictures, more AACA involvement, more timeliness, etc. From the year it won Master Webmaster Award to this years 'AOE', it was clearly better. Some of our members are scratching their heads over this too. I look at those sites that maintained the Master Webmaster Award and can see only creative differences. However, our webmaster, a very busy person we all appreciate a bunch, does not chat endlessly on this forum like some of the 'MWA' winners - maybe thats the difference....

[tcmb67]

I was wondering about this myself. I know the newsletters are judged by a point system. Are web sites still judged subjectively? Our site had won the Award of Distinction for the first two years and then this year it won the award of Merit.

[novaman]

I'd like to see a"NAAP" point system for the websites too. I'm an editor as well as webmaster, and the NAAP was a good thing. The problem with judging websites without a points system of some kind is he who can do programing is most always going to have an advanatage. The websites are to get infromation out to members and invite the publice to join us. They don't have to be fancy to do that.

[gagliaj]

Hello everyone, thanks for the comments and exchange concerning the web site and the web site contest. My name is Joe Gagliano and I will be the VP- Internet for 2008. It has taken me a little longer than anticipated to transition into this position as I was the club Secretary last year and had to close out some 2007 business before I could jump in with both feet on this one. Unfortunately, I did not have direct involvement with the contest judging last year so I can not comment on the results but I will do some investigation.
To the best of my knowledge the criteria for judging did not change from 2006 to 2007 nor do I intend to change it this year. I would appreciate any comments and suggestions concerning the contest, we'll certainly look into a point judging approach like the newsletter contest, NAAP, if it is concluded that is the best and fairest way to do it.
Thanks