jester_s1

I was referring to the drone situation in the comments you responded to. It was concern about drones, which the public can't help but associate with traditional models, that got the whole regulation thing started.
The statement you want me to support with facts was that the AMA did the best they could. That's a value judgment, not a statement of fact. I say it because the AMA was in a precarious position. It was obvious that the EC wanted to bring the drone hobby under the AMA umbrella. That would have meant considerably income, so it made sense. Besides, organizations that succeed are usually the forward thinking ones. So there was the vision of having drone pilots become AMA members, then there was the FAA who wanted proposals and feedback that would satisfy the safety demands being placed on them, and then there were the AMA members screaming that they'd only be happy if nothing at all ever changed. There was no way to please everybody. So the EC had to go the route that they thought would do the AMA the most good. I think their error was sitting the fence too much; they did a mid course change which invalidated much of the work they had started with.