Originally Posted by franklin_m

I see you chose to keep using the red method...

"How much input came from public internet forums?"
None. But that's only because we chose another method. Created an email address from our constituents that went straight to me...thus free of any filtering by intermediaries (in this case departments or individuals that worked for me). It allowed me to keep up on the pulse of the people I'm supposed to be serving. And allowed them to directly challenge me or my decisions (i.e. one form of accountability). We also did monthly meetings with one or more groups of constituents, scheduled so that we hit everyone once a year. Again, open forum, no filtering, direct from the people to the decision maker.

I guess I'm confused by the use of I and we. None of the input was filtered before it was sent to you but it was sent directly to you. So you did all the filtering? Sure monthly meetings good when dealing with small groups, but impractical when dealing with 180k+ members.

"I understand, but those are all life choices we make."
I'm trying to do what I can to influence based on the time available to me and balanced against other more important commitments. Surely you're not trying to say that I'm wrong or less of an AMA member, or have less of a right to an opinion because I choose not to devote as much time to AMA as you or others do?

If you reread my previous post in its entirety, you'll learn that no where in my post did I indicate that you're wrong in voicing your opinion.

I'm simply trying to ascertain how you're applying your own recommendations to the situation at hand. You stated:

"At what point do you stop putting good money after bad."

Time is money. With 1,509+ detailed posts consuming hundreds of hours with no measurable results, I'm curious of the KPI's you've identified that, using you own analogy, recommend you continue to "put good money after bad"?

In a previous post you indicated a six-figure salary as well many high priority responsibilities many of us share, family, etc.

Considering someone with a six-figure salary renews their AMA membership at the old rate ($58) that amounts to less than 0.058% of their annual salary.

What I'm trying to understand is the ROI of one annual expense of < 0.058% of an annual salary that consumes dozens of hours annually, especially considering the list of priorities identified earlier.


"We've all spent money on things we've never used. It's only hindsight that we realize it was a waste. We can't blame anyone but ourselves for that."
I'm trying to avoid the hindsight issue by setting up some criteria now upon which I'll make a future decision. You probably could care less, but I see it as better than hindsight.

We all try to avoid hindsight issues, but since we can't predict the future it's quite difficult.