SFWA is doing a serious overhaul of the website in an effort to bring it into the twenty-first century. Interested in helping make it user friendly? Then this job might be for you.
Edited to add: This position is for an editor, not a webmaster or designer. You would be dealing with the content of the site, but we have someone else to do the heavy lifting on the design.
Estimated time required: 15 – 25 hours per month (Initially more, but workload would vary seasonally.)
SFWA Content Editor/Webstaff Administrator
Job Description:
The person in this position would perform the following tasks:
1. Advise the Board on the future direction of SFWA web presence, set priorities for SFWA web presence, and assist in recruiting volunteers as needed.
2. Gather, organize, and provide content to the SFWA webmaster.
3. Organize webstaff volunteers, determine staffing priorities, assign jobs, and maintain communication within the webstaff. Develop a plan for updating sfwa.org in a timely manner.
4. Serve as liaison between the SFWA webmaster and webstaff and the Forum and Bulletin editors, Executive Director, Other SFWA committee chairs as directed by the President. Coordinate duties with the webmaster.
Requirements:
Qualified candidates should have excellent organization and written communication skills, as well as an understanding of current web technology. Understanding budgetary organization is helpful. Membership in SFWA is required.
Benefits: Resume worthy credit, close contact with established SF professionals, help shape the face of SFWA. Stipend offered. Interested parties should submit resumes to sfwavolunteer@gmail.com no later than June 15, 2008.
Please pass this along to anyone that you think might be interested. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask.
it’s so tempting! and if i didn’t already know how much I would shake my fist, I would apply 😉
HA! I just and I mean, just sent you an email to make sure you saw this.
I think there would be far less fist-shaking than you might think. When I say “over-haul” I mean, raze and build anew.
I’d definitely bite if I qualified as a SFWA member.
You’re qualified to be an associate. That’s all it takes. Heck, affiliate status would also work.
Is there a compelling reason for the SFWA membership requirement? My fingers were poised on the keys to recommend Jeremy, and then I saw his comment elsewhere about not being a member.
To the best of my knowledge, there are about two SFWA members who identify themselves as web designers and are actually qualified as such. That’s a tiny pool.
The Website Content editor needs to be able to access members only information. On the other hand the Designer of the site, doesn’t. We don’t need a member for that position and are looking at several candidates, including Jeremy. He just didn’t know that his name was being bandied about.
Ah! A content editor is a very different beast.
I would hope that any reasonably professional consultant could be trusted not to divulge whatever s/he saw, but given the prevailing attitudes toward privacy, I imagine such optimism wouldn’t fly with the membership.
Because we’d like the content editor to read the private sff.net boards, I can understand why this restriction makes sense. Even with a non-disclosure agreement, some people will feel uncomfortable. Also, having an editor who is a member will, we think, make it easier to communicate about what member needs are.
But a designer? Oh yeah, we’re looking beyond the membership for that one.
With most sites, the consultant just doesn’t care what’s going on in the private areas. But yeah, it’s hard to find a web geek who isn’t into SF. 🙂
On the basis of what sale do you think I am qualified to be an associate?
I sold two stories to Interzone before they were removed from eligibility. I really thought they were going to be my in back then, but when I saw the checks I got–nowhere near pro rates, I didn’t think I could even bother. Because while it was a pro market, I was not paid pro rates.
Ironically, I have been paid pro rates on several occasions, but by entities not recognized by SFWA.
I was basing it on Interzone sales, but I didn’t know that the checks were small. I bet you could still make a case for it.
I do want to clarify that this position is an editorial one dealing with content, not a design position.