I think the key point is results.
MSSociety have a track record of making of putting business decions that conflict with patients. It's not entirely their employees fault and many want positive results as much as the rest of us but the profiteers (senior staff, feeder companies,etc) put their bottom line first & this directly conflicts with health issues.
Nothing is based on results if you're considering patient care.
CCSVI alliance, although an intended solution only feed the problem as they're already being lead up the garden path by wallopers intent on extending their own business interests at the expense of results (for PWMS). They are an advocacy group but clearly clueless when it comes to online SEO & that is where a huge % of their audience lies & where they could overtake MSSociety.
http://ccsvialliance.org/index.php?opti ... Itemid=107
<meta name="keywords" content="CCSVI, Multiple Sclerosis...blah,blah, disaster"
should be "science advisory board"
These are assuming proper keyword research has been done, which it hasn't.
Are h tags being used? b? I? repetition?
Anchor text "CCSVI alliance US"?
"Our aim is to provide MS patients, caregivers, and medical professionals with a definitive resource for learning"
Sounds good but pointless if no-one sees it.
Currently CCSVIalliance need others to believe that they are first class advocates but fall at the first technical hurdle.
Offline is for conference sales & business deals and sure it will get the cash flowing in but for who? How effective? Are the donations being used efficiently? Is joans generous donations being pissed up against a wall?
This isn't an attack on alliance (who do offer good info), im just wondering if anyone in the organisation has considered efficiency & if they think they're worthy of requesting donations?
"Our aim is to provide MS patients, caregivers, and medical professionals with a definitive resource for learning."
Some of you already know my opinion on MS charities so I'll stop here.