Personally, I think the man (Steve Kaluf) has as much right to offer an opinion as the other editors. That's about all Bob Hunt offers -- opinions -- same as we do here on someone else's web site. Of course those Editors do not have to endure immediate cave-ins as we do when we dig holes for ourselves. IMO it is nice when an AMA person will speak something of his own rather than quote the company news-line.

Operationally, whoever secured, contracted and maintains any flying facility has -- and I certainly hope they DEFEND -- total rights to how, when, and where that facility is used, within the specifications of their contract and/or agreements, between others and/or themselves. AMA itself has no right to intervene in that portion of a club's business, yet they have a right to define how the NATs will be condoned.

In this case, I see many loopholes in Steve's arguments, however this is not the place to present such. Only those that have admired the wonders of a microfilm moving along in a slow walk speed, or heaved a hand-launch glider into the rafters or performed either awe or accomplishment of those other wonders of rubber-indoor, can truly contribute to those decisions of co-existence with air-disturbing electric motor props. I doubt many on this forum have done such but I know some have.

Again, IMO, the choices of the poll were considerably slanted.