First I would like to say what I know of Bliss and he is a nice man. Second things is the I don't care attitude of the membership. I have always been puzzled about the way we approach the governing of the AMA. I think you are a very good man. There is no doubt you love the AMA and what it stands for. It is to bad you give the impression you are mad. Know you are not, but that is the impression that has been relayed to me by some friends. The third thing I would like to point out about the government of the AMA is it is hard to navigate. There will never be a grass roots effort to change much because of the way it is set up. I and many others would like to know how and why the AMA was set up the way it is.
Of my many worries in life. The government of the AMA is down on my list. My concern for the AMA is my use of model aircraft as a escape form many of those life worries. The connection with the AMA has always been a part of securing a field for my escape.
Question? What is your take on how the government of the AMA was developed and why? Some people go off on all the short comings of some folks that run the AMA or are employed by the AMA. That really serves no purpose. I think the very structure of the AMA is a real problem if there is a real problem. Hoss, you and I share membership in other organizations. Many of these groups have a State by state representation. You have State conventions and from these conventions we elect people to go to National gatherings to elect members to represent us. Those people in turn elect a board to oversee the operation of the National organization for a set term. Not saying the EC system is not the way to go. What I do think is the EC system is hard to understand and seems distant from the membership. Something I think that keeps the AMA from going to the next level.
Thanks, I would like to hear what you and others think of the question.