Per: You cover two completely different things in your excellent contribution. On ICOM-L and ICOM's apparently complicated structures: it has never been the case that members can only communicate through the complex maze that you describe. More important, as the Executive Council member with special responsibility for ICOM's Internet policy and developments from 1994 to 1998 I can assure you that one of the key aims in setting up ICOM-L was to both speed up and democratise communication amongst ALL members, not just those holding official positions in the national and international committees or the Executive Council. The lack of use of ICOM-L for the agreed purposes and according to the policies for this - by either the central bodies of ICOM or the general membership has been a matter of continuing concern, frustration and deep disappointment to all of us who worked so hard to ensure that ICOM stayed at the forefront of the Information and Communication Technology revolution - in the way it was when we launched the extensive and very advanced internet facilities in 1995. The fact that it took three months to get onto ICOM-L the English version of Bernice Murphy's urgent appeal for members to submit evidence and views to her ICOM Reform Task Force (and five months for the French version) says it all. On the University Museums issue: So far as I know everyone welcomes Peter Stanbury's efforts and agrees that some organisation for university museums is necessary. Likewise, nobody can defend the current structure of international committees - particularly the "curatorial subject" committees (as opposed to the interdisciplinary committees. However, during my more than 25 years in ICOM I know that every suggestion that there should be some rationalisation - e.g. by merging the five or six applied arts international committees, or even Fine Art and Modern Art, has been so ferociously attacked from existing interests that the idea has been dropped immediately. However, your analysis of the situation in relation to a university museums committee misses one absolutely key point: anyone joining such a committee as a full member would first have to give up their existing international committee membership (and any office within this). Several of the present international committees are currently very dependent on university museum staff members, and have genuine concerns about their survival if a large and strong university museums committee emerges. In contrast with this, an affiliated organisation has its own membership which does not prohibit membership or even holding office in an international committee at the same time. It is also able to have its own legal personality and funds (neither of which is possible for international committees - which are absolutely integral parts of ICOM as a Paris-registered ="Association" under the French law of 1 July 1901). However, affiliated associations still have a majority of ICOM personal and institutional members, who can e.g. run for office in ICOM etc. I don't think that ICOM members within - e.g. the International Association of Transport Museums or the Commonwealth Museums Association - to take just two very different examples - regard themselves as second-class members because their home base is an affiliated organisation rather than an international committee. Indeed, the trend is likely to be in the opposite direction to what you propose. Already, two or three of the largest international committees have been discussing for some time the possibility that they may in effect be forced to re-constitute themselves as affiliated organisations in order to be able to cope with both their long-standing funding problems and the legal/constitutional problems that are emerging. Similarly, no doubt the Reform Task Force will be looking at this issue very closely from the other end of the telescope. Under French law the President, Vice-presidents, Treasurer and Secretary-General (not the full Executive Council) carry full fiscal, civil and even criminal liability for all the finances of, and any wrong-doing within, an international committee, even though they have in practice absolutely no control over how the international committees conduct their business. I can tell you that during my six years as a vice-president, from 1992 - 1998, there were two or three actual or suspected problems within international committees that caused me sleepless nights. Best wishes Patrick J. Boylan Chairperson, ICTOP: International Committee for the Training of Personnel City University, Frobisher Crescent, Barbican, London EC2Y 8HB, UK; phone: +44-171-477.8750, fax:+44-171-477.8887; Home: "The Deepings", Gun Lane, Knebworth, Herts. SG3 6BJ, UK; phone & fax: +44-1438-812.658; E-mail: [log in to unmask]; Web site: http://www.city.ac.uk/artspol/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Change ICOM-L subscription options and search the archives at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html