Originally Posted by franklin_m

The I/We is a military thing...it's always the team that did something, even if it was an individual effort. In this case yes, all input came to me, I did the filtering. I did the responding. Some got a private response, some of the Q&A was published in the paper, some answered in other forums, some not answered. But, as I said earlier, "we" did it - hence the use of that pronoun. I'm getting sloppy as I get farther away from my military writing.

If one individual did the filtering it wasn't a "we" thing. I suspected some control issues were at play, but didn't want speculate until they were confirmed.

What's critical was the goal we(I) were(was) trying to achieve? Transparency in decision making.

So there was transparency in the decision, but filtering of the input data?

As long as the decision is reasonable, rational, and lawful, I found that people tend to support you if they understand the "why" behind the "what." They may not agree with what you decided, but they tend to at least tolerate it if they understand the logic or the other factors they might not have considered.

Agreed.

In the case of the AMA, I think we were told the "what" (embrace drones) but never were graced with the "why." I'd argue this is especially important when it's a close vote, in this case the I think it was the president who cast the tiebreaker. Ever notice what happens on close votes in the House or Senate? There's a greater than average number of people doing pressers explaining their votes. That's not on accident. Again, people tend to understand the "what" if they're trusted to know the "why." I'd love for AMA to share with us unwashed masses of general members the "why" behind that decision. If it was a blatant attempt to stem the tide of an aging population...just tell us.

When organizations make these decisions it should be based on their mission statement. What part of the AMA's mission statement would lead you to believe embracing drones is inconsistent with their mission statement?

As for what's practical and impractical, I'd like to give you a more complete answer. What do you consider a small group (and therefore anything else would be large)?

I'd probably consider a small group on the order of several hundred. Maybe < 250.

As to the time, that's mine to choose how to spend. If I want to spend hours and hours on posts with no return, that's my choice. It's a false comparison because it's only my money (time) I'm spending. I alone choose how to spend my time and if I want to waste thousands of hours posting, quite honestly, that's none of your business. It also does not in any way detract from my arguments, despite any attempts to imply that it does by raising the issue. Thus, I don't need KPIs, because the only person I'm accountable to is me.

Principle centered leadership is just that, leadership based on principles. Principles are natural laws that apply everywhere. If you believe in the principles, you follow them. As principles, you cannot apply them selectively. Those who don't believe in them shouldn't preach them. Sure, I preach them, but that's only because I believe in them. I also believe they apply as equally to me as they do anything else.

I agree the hundreds of hours invested doesn't detract from the arguments in any way. However, as the time investment into those arguments continues to increase it does significantly detract from the credibility of those arguments as the measurable change resulting from said arguments remains zero.

Your statement sums it up quite nicely:

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

Now, an organization that collects dues from members and exists as a non-profit thus reaping benefits of that in the form of reduced taxes to support the nation? Yep. KPIs are in order.

Is the AMA engaging in any illegal activity? If so, what?

They're not accountable to themselves, they're accountable to us, the people that pay the bills, and the taxpayers who graciously allow them to have tax exempt status.

As individuals, we need to be accountable to ourselves before we can be accountable to others. If we can't establish our own KPI's and follow them how can we hold others accountable for doing the same?

As to the AMA rate as a comparison against my salary, it's not $58 anymore, it's now $75. Again though, it's irrelevant as to the percentage of my pay. I don't have to justify it to you.

Did you pay the $58 or the $75 rate? It's not about justifying it me, it's about justifying it against the principles.

On this issue, I simply look at it in terms of what I get for the money. For me, it's insurance that pays only after both my homeowners and umbrella policy, a magazine, and the ability to fly at a club - the closest which is 13 miles away - which by the way comes with another $100 annual fee. I paid that $300 for three years and didn't use it once. I'd rather put that $300 into batteries and upgrades for stuff I fly every couple days (when I'm home) within walking distance of my house.

The cost/benefit analysis is a personal choice decision. If the cost/benefit isn't justified it doesn't make sense to purchase any product/service.


And the comment about "We all try to avoid hindsight issues, but since we can't predict the future it's quite difficult." Not much to say... except that you've clearly mastered the obvious.

Since you indicated you are actively working hindsight optimization through future prediction I felt it worthwhile to point that out just in case it was accidentally overlooked.