Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

Dues increase coming? 1 million spent on government relations.....

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

Dues increase coming? 1 million spent on government relations.....

Old 06-26-2015, 01:14 PM
  #326  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

60% plus seems improbable, then again who knows, but I would tend to doubt anything close to 60, even 50. Not an accountant by any means but I think the way the question can be asked would might result in different answers, all with different numbers. 2013 financial report shows round numbers of 8.6 million in income versus 3.3 in salary/bennys, but I could have read that wrong. For profit health care services run over 50% (50-54), educational services about the same, construction about 25%, and retail services about 20-30%.
Old 06-26-2015, 08:44 PM
  #327  
jester_s1
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 7,266
Received 35 Likes on 30 Posts
Default

60-70% going toward salaries sounds about right for a mid size non-profit. You'd be surprised at how much of any charitable donation you make goes to paying the people who work for that organization. Not that it's a waste, because usually those who work for the organization do a lot. But I imagine most of what we send to Muncie goes to pay for insurance, then the salaries of the employees, and not more than 10-15% is left to assist clubs, acquire flying sites, etc.
Old 06-27-2015, 03:17 AM
  #328  
BarracudaHockey
My Feedback: (11)
 
BarracudaHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 26,960
Received 343 Likes on 274 Posts
Default

Well, think of this, Tony's salary for example goes directly towards assisting clubs finding and retaining flying sites....

Listen, I know a lot of those folks, and the people that work up there genuinely love what they do and work long hours for what I'm sure are pretty modest salaries.
Old 06-27-2015, 06:05 AM
  #329  
astrohog
My Feedback: (1)
 
astrohog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 3,344
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

How about FREE membership and a 1 - 2% tax on all our hobby purchases?

Astro
Old 06-27-2015, 10:12 AM
  #330  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey
Well, think of this, Tony's salary for example goes directly towards assisting clubs finding and retaining flying sites....

Listen, I know a lot of those folks, and the people that work up there genuinely love what they do and work long hours for what I'm sure are pretty modest salaries.
+1. I've worked with him a couple of times and he earns every penny of whatever his salary is. Just the driving alone that that guy does hauling around the flight sim trailer....
Old 06-27-2015, 05:33 PM
  #331  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by jester_s1
60-70% going toward salaries sounds about right for a mid size non-profit. You'd be surprised at how much of any charitable donation you make goes to paying the people who work for that organization. Not that it's a waste, because usually those who work for the organization do a lot. But I imagine most of what we send to Muncie goes to pay for insurance, then the salaries of the employees, and not more than 10-15% is left to assist clubs, acquire flying sites, etc.
I know there is a difference between a charity and a non-profit, and perhaps I'm thinking of a what a charity is graded by as compared to what they spend on overhead versus what they give, but I'm still having a hard time seeing 60-70% of a non-profits income going to salaries. I'm not an well versed in that piece of compensation etc, I just can't get my head around those figures. I think 20-to herhaps a high of 40 might be reasonable, and even lower for a "charity", whose goal one would hope is 10-20%.
Old 06-27-2015, 05:52 PM
  #332  
Jim Branaum
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Fair Oaks Ranch, TX
Posts: 2,633
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
I know there is a difference between a charity and a non-profit, and perhaps I'm thinking of a what a charity is graded by as compared to what they spend on overhead versus what they give, but I'm still having a hard time seeing 60-70% of a non-profits income going to salaries. I'm not an well versed in that piece of compensation etc, I just can't get my head around those figures. I think 20-to herhaps a high of 40 might be reasonable, and even lower for a "charity", whose goal one would hope is 10-20%.
Yes, a very significant difference once you ignore the IRS (a tough job but someone has to do it!).

Charities collect funds to disperse them to targeted individuals while non-profits frequently collect funds to achieve a common goal and frequently get their status through education. So charities are graded on keeping overhead down while non-profits are graded (by those donating) - are they reaching their goals?

We have been fighting the checkbook modeler who does not care about JQ Public for decades. It is only recently the impact of those checkbooks is being seen in various local government attempts to outlaw the drones because someone used them improperly (Trappy?). The unfortunate thing is only the bad get the press and they have been getting a lot of it of late because they are so uneducated in the hobby. The bottom line there is that the approach AMA has been using helps, needs to be supported, and costs money we did not expect to spend.

No, I do not like the dues increase but I do like the privilege of flying my models and as far as I can see the AMA has contributed directly to that more than anyone else.
Old 06-27-2015, 08:25 PM
  #333  
countilaw
 
countilaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Grand Prairie, TX
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Our dues are really a small sacrifice for what we get in return from the AMA. Every time I talk with someone in Muncie, they are always cheerful and helpful. They are truly a great bunch of folks.
Frank Cox
Old 06-28-2015, 01:39 AM
  #334  
islandflyer
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The amount of the increase in dues is not an issue for many, but I can understand that it it may be a problem for some.
However, the amount voted by AMA to spend on the multirotor/fpv/drone (and what ever else it it can be called) community is a misdirected use of the funds we, the aeromodelers, have paid in.
If you don't think that drones are that much of a problem, take a look here: www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/01/faa-drone-report-incidents-mishaps
This shows a list of 194 incidents involving drones, reported to FAA in 2014 alone! This does not includes un-reported incidents, law suits regarding privacy issues for pictures taken, insurance claims. etc....

Most r/c modelers have no issue with multirotors flown in line of site at the local club: these are hardly any more than a heli with more than one rotor.

But once you add FPV/GPS/self guidance systems, the aircraft (multirotor, heli or fixed wing) has become a drone. Most I have seen are flown with no spotter, not in direct line of sight, or in accordance with the AMA rules, and they likely never will. You can google "drone for sale" and find countless outlets selling these that are not affiliated with, or recommending AMA membership.
It is increasingly clear that drone flying is not model aviation: in fact, the military drones, even only equipped with observation cameras, are certainly not model aviation....
To the drone community, the flying object is only a platform, a transportation system, for the electronic and camera equipment it carries, making it very different from model aviation which has always focused on the joy of flying, whether it be scale, aerobatics, racing, etc. Drones are simply not model aviation, and pose challenges and problems that a model aviation CBO is ill equipped to address. And if the AMA did focus on addressing all these issues, it would have to loose what should be its sole focus, the reason why we elected our representatives in the first place: represent and develop model aviation.

Like minded people sharing a common passion are best equipped to gather and form an association that cater specifically to their needs; the drone community needs to form their own association if they do not have one yet, and the AMA need to rededicate itself to what it was created for, and what we have been supporting it for: Model Aviation. Drones are not Models, they are Drones. The AMA has done a fabulous job at representing and protecting model aviation for decades, and I hope it continues.

By blurring the lines between these two separate activities, the AMA is exposing us to all the issues that drones have and will increasingly generate in the eyes of the public, the media, and the law makers. This is a disservice to the vast majority of us who are aeromodelers who have always supported the AMA, but have any interest in drones.

We are not subjects of the AMA, we are members. As such we should be consulted on such matter as dedicating a quarter of a million dollars for the multirotor program, as it was voted last year. The vote was 6 against 6, and the tie was broken by the current president (see here:http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutam...ecminutes.aspx)

I realize some (but not most) AMA members may fly some form of drone: I am sure many also shoot guns, and ride motorcycles; it does not mean the AMA should manage these other two activities too.
The drones have attracted more negative press in the few short years of their existence than has model aviation in 78 years of safe flying under the AMA's umbrella. I see not good coming to model aviation if we accept all the liabilities coming from an activity most of us do not practice.
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it. But these major decisions, especially when they involve such a large budget, cannot be taken but the VP's without our knowledge or consent.

Last edited by islandflyer; 06-28-2015 at 01:42 AM.
Old 06-28-2015, 03:05 AM
  #335  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,561
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by islandflyer
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it.
I think that's a great plan...
Old 06-28-2015, 04:14 AM
  #336  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m
I think that's a great plan...
Wonder if we would get more people to vote? When the 1/4 of a million was voted on D8 was one of the 6 that voted no. I still not received a reply on my request as to just what we intend to spend on this.

Mike
Old 06-28-2015, 05:43 AM
  #337  
littlecrankshaf
My Feedback: (58)
 
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by islandflyer

Like minded people sharing a common passion are best equipped to gather and form an association that cater specifically to their needs; the drone community needs to form their own association if they do not have one yet, and the AMA need to rededicate itself to what it was created for, and what we have been supporting it for: Model Aviation.
Please forgive the snippet... I couldn't agree more! I too believe there should be another association for non traditional recreational sUAS community. Although I would hope the new association would also allow the traditional "modeling" sUAS guys to join them as well, as it is those guys that helped develop the new recreational sUASs such as quads and FPV.
Old 06-28-2015, 05:58 AM
  #338  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf
Please forgive the snippet... I couldn't agree more! I too believe there should be another association for non traditional recreational sUAS community. Although I would hope the new association would also allow the traditional "modeling" sUAS guys to join them as well, as it is those guys that helped develop the new recreational sUASs such as quads and FPV.
I wonder just how far that would get or would even would be supported by them and why they would even want too? Right now they have the AMA fighting their battles and spending our money. Why would they even try?
Mike
Old 06-28-2015, 06:00 AM
  #339  
islandflyer
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket
Wonder if we would get more people to vote? When the 1/4 of a million was voted on D8 was one of the 6 that voted no. I still not received a reply on my request as to just what we intend to spend on this.

Mike
That is because some (not all) of the AMA VP's and executives are behaving like royalties and feel that we should be more like subjects, and not really members.
It is up to us, the members to be more attentive to what they do, what they plan to do, and reclaim our association so it focuses solely on what we elected them to do.
I know that one of the motivations behind what they do in the "drone" program is greed for the association to grow (and I am in no way implying personal gain). However, they were not elected with the general mission to grow by whatever means they can.
Growth is not the primary mission we entrusted them with: their primary mission is the represent, protect and develop our hobby of aeromodeling. And that is not done effectively by embracing another new activity most of us do not practice, and which comes with such a heavy load of liabilities.

It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	AMA.png
Views:	53
Size:	228.2 KB
ID:	2106148  
Old 06-28-2015, 06:16 AM
  #340  
littlecrankshaf
My Feedback: (58)
 
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rcmiket
I wonder just how far that would get or would even would be supported by them and why they would even want too? Right now they have the AMA fighting their battles and spending our money. Why would they even try?
Mike
You've got a real good point. The horse has left the barn...That play has now been pretty much been short circuited. I think I'll just get me a fist full of AMA stickers and logos, put them on all of my models to show my allegiance.
Old 06-28-2015, 06:20 AM
  #341  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf
The horse has left the barn...
Yes sir and IMO no amount of money will get it back in. I'll renew for 2 years next month after that expires I may just walk away if the "blank check" policy toward this continues.

Mike

Last edited by rcmiket; 06-28-2015 at 06:24 AM.
Old 06-28-2015, 08:01 AM
  #342  
jester_s1
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 7,266
Received 35 Likes on 30 Posts
Default

Porcia83- Those numbers are simply not realistic. When a non profit skimps on salaries, they wind up with incompetent people. We pay AMA employees to work to advance the hobby, and that's what they do.
Old 06-28-2015, 09:17 AM
  #343  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,354
Received 49 Likes on 43 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by islandflyer
That is because some (not all) of the AMA VP's and executives are behaving like royalties and feel that we should be more like subjects, and not really members.
It is up to us, the members to be more attentive to what they do, what they plan to do, and reclaim our association so it focuses solely on what we elected them to do.
I know that one of the motivations behind what they do in the "drone" program is greed for the association to grow (and I am in no way implying personal gain). However, they were not elected with the general mission to grow by whatever means they can.
Growth is not the primary mission we entrusted them with: their primary mission is the represent, protect and develop our hobby of aeromodeling. And that is not done effectively by embracing another new activity most of us do not practice, and which comes with such a heavy load of liabilities.

It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.


Good Luck Herve !

Even trying to get a definition of the word drone established here has been , trying , at best .

In my opinion , a drone is a commercially operated unmanned aircraft being flown for a specific paid mission .

A model aircraft , even if equipped with #550 legal FPV , is flown for the fun of flying only , with no other mission attached to the flight .

Now if your talking about not chasing the commercial operations , I'm 100% with you on that . Our AMA is supposed to be #1 looking out for aircraft modeling and #2 a non profit organization . Once either or both of those is lost , we hobbyists will be swept aside in short order to make room for all the big drone money that'll be rolling in ......
Old 06-28-2015, 09:48 AM
  #344  
littlecrankshaf
My Feedback: (58)
 
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun


In my opinion , a drone is a commercially operated unmanned aircraft being flown for a specific paid mission .
I can agree with that but would not exclude military or any other similar use that is of any nature other than recreational... Guys that call their little toys drones amuse me somehow... sort of like when I call my little model an Extra 300...LOL
Old 06-28-2015, 10:05 AM
  #345  
islandflyer
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun
Good Luck Herve !

Even trying to get a definition of the word drone established here has been , trying , at best .

In my opinion , a drone is a commercially operated unmanned aircraft being flown for a specific paid mission .

A model aircraft , even if equipped with #550 legal FPV , is flown for the fun of flying only , with no other mission attached to the flight .

Now if your talking about not chasing the commercial operations , I'm 100% with you on that . Our AMA is supposed to be #1 looking out for aircraft modeling and #2 a non profit organization . Once either or both of those is lost , we hobbyists will be swept aside in short order to make room for all the big drone money that'll be rolling in ......
I agree with you. But because drone flying brings such different issues and concerns as compared to model aviation, it really deserves its own CBO. Only the drone users can fully understand and address their concerns and challenges.
Similarly, motorcycle clubs/associations, trucker associations, and automobile associations all share the same roads, but have their own respective groups and associations.
In all of these there may be some members who belong to more than one association, but each is best equipped to represent its own group of members, and respond to their respective concerns.
Old 06-28-2015, 10:13 AM
  #346  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by islandflyer
Growth is not the primary mission we entrusted them with: their primary mission is the represent, protect and develop our hobby of aeromodeling. And that is not done effectively by embracing another new activity most of us do not practice, and which comes with such a heavy load of liabilities.

It would be a better investment if we dedicate some resources toward educating the public, the media and law makers on the fact that drones are NOT model aviation, and whatever they are doing, THAT IS NOT US, instead of trying to cover "anything that flies) like the ad below.
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, thank god one person's opinion has no overall affect on how this "hobby" of ours is defined. Thank god.

The first problem with your thesis is the use of the word "drone". The definition of this is tricky. But regardless, to say that this is not part of model aviation is incredibly...wrong. On so many levels. Luckily the AMA continues to have the hobby's interest at heart, despite the comments about them acting like "royalities"...LOL a ton on that one. As if they need to run everything they do by the membership. Ya, that would be reasonable and work smooth I'm sure. Last I knew they VOTED as they were supposed to, and the voting results were what they were. It wasn't done by proclamation or decree.

Of course growth is a component of what they do. It doesn't always means a vertical growth (those greedy royals just want more members for the coffers...mwahahaha) , it can also mean growth in the hobby, and what's included in the hobby, and whats related in the hobby. I'm sure the RC heli pilots are thankful someone didn't come along back in the day to proclaim them NOT PART OF MODEL AVIATION.

Check out this guy, an absolute genius.

http://flitetest.com/articles/northr...b-design-build

He has been a guest at our club's events for 3-4 years. His builds are absolutely amazing. One of the first things he brought 4 years ago was a quad, self built and programmed for flight. The crowds were amazed. Almost all the aircraft he built were done by scratch. The X-47 build is just stunning ( and either maidened at our field, or just after maidening). His work is most definitely tied into aeromodeling.
Old 06-28-2015, 10:15 AM
  #347  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by islandflyer
I agree with you. But because drone flying brings such different issues and concerns as compared to model aviation, it really deserves its own CBO. Only the drone users can fully understand and address their concerns and challenges.
Similarly, motorcycle clubs/associations, trucker associations, and automobile associations all share the same roads, but have their own respective groups and associations.
In all of these there may be some members who belong to more than one association, but each is best equipped to represent its own group of members, and respond to their respective concerns.
It certainly warrants a SIG designation...I suspect you'll seen that sooner rather than later.
Old 06-28-2015, 10:23 AM
  #348  
porcia83
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 7,269
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by islandflyer
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it.


Originally Posted by franklin_m
I think that's a great plan...
So would their vote on that one single issue be some type of litmus test? Depending on their position it would be an up or down vote? Like it's not hard enough to find people to get involved (let alone the membership to actually vote). IMO, it's shortsighted to base a vote on one single issue. What if everything else they bring to the table is outstanding?

I do recall though, not in the to distant past, someone running for an AMA position being asked for his position on something. He struggled mightily to give a specific response, and was called out on it repeatedly. Took a few tries to finally give a definitive answer.
Old 06-28-2015, 11:17 AM
  #349  
rcmiket
 
rcmiket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by porcia83
Originally Posted by islandflyer
The wisest course of action now is to demand that the AMA VP candidates make their position on drones known in their campaign statements, and let the votes speak. If the majority want drones as part of the AMA, so be it.
So would their vote on that one single issue be some type of litmus test? Depending on their position it would be an up or down vote? Like it's not hard enough to find people to get involved (let alone the membership to actually vote). IMO, it's shortsighted to base a vote on one single issue. What if everything else they bring to the table is outstanding?

I do recall though, not in the to distant past, someone running for an AMA position being asked for his position on something. He struggled mightily to give a specific response, and was called out on it repeatedly. Took a few tries to finally give a definitive answer.
We as members deserve to know just what the plan is along with just how much they plane to spend. Let the members decide. After all it's our money and we elected them to represent us the members.

Mike
Old 06-28-2015, 11:17 AM
  #350  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,354
Received 49 Likes on 43 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by islandflyer
I agree with you. But because drone flying brings such different issues and concerns as compared to model aviation, it really deserves its own CBO. Only the drone users can fully understand and address their concerns and challenges.
Similarly, motorcycle clubs/associations, trucker associations, and automobile associations all share the same roads, but have their own respective groups and associations.
In all of these there may be some members who belong to more than one association, but each is best equipped to represent its own group of members, and respond to their respective concerns.
Hi Herve , You and I are on the same page about the drone definition and Thank You sir ! I was truly beginning to think that I was alone in that view . I think also that your 100% correct that the more varied interests an association or organization tries to represent , the less and less actual representation each small subdivision gets . Your example of the motorcyclists AMA is a great one , I don't see that AMA chasing bicycle sales dollars , even though they both share two wheels . I'll enclose a shot of my last motorcycle , a first model goldwing that I traded to a good friend a few years ago for a car I wanted . It was time , I had kinda aged out of the bike thing ....

Originally Posted by porcia83
It certainly warrants a SIG designation...I suspect you'll seen that sooner rather than later.
Hi Porcia83 ,

I can see an AMA SIG for FPV (under #550 rules) as a natural and I'd think it may do ok since the FPV ranks are growing faster than any other areomodeling sub division . Only thing is , it seems not a lot of folks these days seem to care for groups and associations much , I really wonder in the future how many SIGs will exist within what may become a pretty thin organization , unless of course if it ends up being a forced "AMA or no flying period" kind of thing , which is what some seem to want . (And NO , I am NOT one who wants any one organization totally in charge of what flys . I support the AMA , and I support the freedom to chose to be AMA or not . Once membership becomes forced , we loose all airs of benevolence and do goodishy promoting the hobby flying of models , and become just another for profit arm sub contracted arm of the Govt) ...

Last edited by init4fun; 06-28-2015 at 11:20 AM.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.