ORIGINAL: Stickbuilder
If the AMA only wanted posts that portrayed them and it's members in a good way, then they should not have opened the forum up to the members at large, but only allowed the Leader Members to make posts. The only membership that counts or matters (other than the funds collected) to the AMA seem to be this part of the membership.
The AMA has done a lot of good for the hobby, but there appears to be a hidden agenda that wants only a select few to have any voice it the enterprise. At the same time, there is a lot that the AMA has done that does not well serve the rest of the membership. We (those with open memberships) don't have any voice in what goes on in Muncie. True, we do get to vote, but our voices are not heard at the EC level.
So if they did not want any negativity, then why did they see the need to install a moderator? I firmly believe that the forum was created with the intention to fail, so that the EC could point at us and say that they did institute a forum, but we (the membership) ruined it. Guess what? The membership at large will never agree on everything. They should not have set the bar so high that no one could clear it.
That's just my opinion (ought to be yours)
Bill, Bottom Feeder #1
AMA 4720
Of interest, this user violated the rules there, was giving a warning, just a warning, the admins and other mods were notified in the 'moderator' section... as you see, all things are documented. The response to a WARNING, is quite interesting.