Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

DoJ Issues Guidance for Counter Drone in US

Notices
AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

DoJ Issues Guidance for Counter Drone in US

Old 04-23-2020, 07:15 AM
  #26  
fliers1
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Lockport, NY
Posts: 1,315
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by fliers1 View Post
Captain Smith ignored seven iceberg warnings from his crew and other ships. If he had called for the ship to slow down then maybe the Titanic disaster would not have happened. ... The belief that the ship was unsinkable was, in part, due to the fact that the Titanic had sixteen watertight compartments.
Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it. ' I posted this as an analogy of what our hobby is going through.
Old 04-23-2020, 11:24 AM
  #27  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by fliers1 View Post
Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it. ' I posted this as an analogy of what our hobby is going through.
Captain Smith of the Titanic is spot on. AMA thought they were invincible and would always have the backing of
Congress. Drones ended that fantasy.

Right off the bat AMA will be losing 25-30K paying customers. Those are members who fly off-site or belong to a
club but only go infrequently and mostly fly closer to home, who will now quit. AMA had over 4 years to prepare for
remote ID and didn't push for an exemption for some type of RC planes that could be flown anywhere, and maybe
keep those members. Instead, AMA went after their monopoly.

This is from AMA's formal comment to the FAA regarding the high profile drone incidents cited in the NPRM:

"AMAís safety protocols would not allow these types of operations."

Who enforces AMA's safety protocols? Not AMA. And these are off-site violations. It's laughable on it's face.
AMA's audacity with the FAA never ends, most included numerous laws being broken.

AMA nominating themselves to be the regulator of all RC flying armed with only their safety guide, while continually
fighting the FAA and expecting FAA to do the enforcement has a price. FAA's vision for the AMA is a country club
where fewer and fewer will have to pony up for the costs of flying fields.

"Over time, the FAA anticipates that most UAS without remote identification will reach the end of their useful
lives or be phased out. As these numbers dwindle, and as compliance with remote identification requirements
becomes cheaper and easier, the number of UAS that need to operate only at FAA-recognized identification
areas would likely drop significantly."


Old 04-23-2020, 11:40 AM
  #28  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24 View Post
This is from AMA's formal comment to the FAA regarding the high profile drone incidents cited in the NPRM:

"AMAís safety protocols would not allow these types of operations."

Who enforces AMA's safety protocols? Not AMA. And these are off-site violations. It's laughable on it's face.
For YEARS I've tried to convince the AMA of the need to enforce their own rules ... but they won't even do that. For YEARS I've tried to get AMA to professionalize their safety program and collect data and evaluate LEADING indicators, but they didn't do that either. And finally, I've tried for YEARS to get them to professionalize things like their LMA program, ut they declined that help as well. Unfortunately, it's all of these things that EARN credibility with the FAA ... but AMA was content to "do it like we've always done it." No wonder I suppose, for the most part the same names have been running the place for decades. And how's that working out for revenue? Paying members? Respect from FAA? Etc. It's not. Time to try something new.

I hoped the recent election might bring some new blood, but the silence in response to my questions above (plan for increasing revenue / plan for getting FAA to reverse its thinking) indicates nothing has changed. All they're doing is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Old 04-23-2020, 12:45 PM
  #29  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

The implication of that quote is that none were AMA members, which is debatable. We'll never know, but the FAA,
and now FBI, have that information, for example from the 77 no-fly violations at this year's Super Bowl, some of
which were by AMA members, guaranteed.

I gather BarracudaHockey is a new member of the EC. I don't have a problem not putting out AMA's strategy on a
forum. I have a lot of respect for him and the others who keep things going on the operations end.
Old 04-23-2020, 02:02 PM
  #30  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 10,397
Received 125 Likes on 119 Posts
Default

Okay, one more shot at the Titanic analogy and I'll leave it alone:
Was Captain Smith at fault? Only to a point. He not only had to deal with icebergs, he had to deal with White Star chairman Joseph Bruce Ismay. It is well known that Ismay was, more or less, running the ship and was known to have over-ruled Smith on many things, one of which was slowing down when going through the icefields. Smith's failure was not throwing Ismay over the side as it probably would have saved the ship if he had.
Ismay also ordered the reduction of lifeboats to the bare minimum required by law so that the passengers would have a better view from the upper decks and, to make things nicer and more convenient for the second class passengers, ordered the watertight bulkheads lowered to below the lowest passenger deck so the passengers wouldn't have to walk through water tight doors, requiring them to step over the bottom frame.
When it came time for the US inquiry, Ismay, a known survivor, tried to get to one of White Star's other ships to avoid the questioning he know was coming. He was caught just before getting to the boarding ramp and taken in front of the inquiry board where, predictably, he claimed to not recall any important information. Can we say coverup?
Now, how does this compare to the AMA? Ismay should be the one being compared to the AMA, not Smith. Smith was retiring after arriving in New York, he just didn't want to make waves by fighting with his boss, Chairman Ismay. Ismay was the one that set policy, dictated how things went(both during the design and construction as well as during the voyage) and, ultimately, was at fault for 1500+ dead passengers and crew

Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 04-23-2020 at 02:05 PM.
Old 04-23-2020, 02:22 PM
  #31  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
Was Captain Smith at fault? Only to a point. He not only had to deal with icebergs, he had to deal with White Star chairman Joseph Bruce Ismay ....
Reading the EC minutes, it's been my opinion that Rich Hanson pretty much decides what is going to be done and the EC goes along with it. So is he the AMA's "Bruce Ismay" ???
Old 04-23-2020, 02:58 PM
  #32  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 10,397
Received 125 Likes on 119 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
Reading the EC minutes, it's been my opinion that Rich Hanson pretty much decides what is going to be done and the EC goes along with it. So is he the AMA's "Bruce Ismay" ???
You would think so. Ismay called the shots during all phases of construction and overruled Smith on several occasions, sounds like Rich Hanson to me. Gee, and to think I've been advocating his termination for how long now? A little late to throw him over the side, the ship is already sinking. Does the AMA have a good enough damage control team to prevent it's total loss(like the USS Franklin back in 1944) or are we going to see it go the way of the Shinano, to the bottom with no chance of saving it?

Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 04-23-2020 at 03:00 PM.
Old 04-23-2020, 05:46 PM
  #33  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
You would think so. Ismay called the shots during all phases of construction and overruled Smith on several occasions, sounds like Rich Hanson to me. Gee, and to think I've been advocating his termination for how long now? A little late to throw him over the side, the ship is already sinking. Does the AMA have a good enough damage control team to prevent it's total loss(like the USS Franklin back in 1944) or are we going to see it go the way of the Shinano, to the bottom with no chance of saving it?
Rich Hanson is a symbol of all that's wrong with the AMA, in particular leading AMA's losing battle against
the FAA. Before 336 was repealed, maybe. But after he was flogging a dead horse..

Hanson was also key to bringing in drones, the primary reason for AMA's demise. Drone membership
peaked out at 8% a few years back. For that AMA threw away the entire model aircraft hobby.


Old 04-23-2020, 07:04 PM
  #34  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

It's probably too late now for an exempt class of model aircraft, but my thought was something the size of the E-flight
Apprentice or Fun Cub at 3 pounds would fill the need. Franklin's NPRM comment recommends 2 pounds and under,
which would be too low IMO.

Another potential idea. The proposed rule encourages early adoption. A remote ID add-on module is will not comply as
written, but nothing says they could not be used pending the final rule. It might at least demonstrate the feasability of
that option. Presumably, Google will be one of the first to have a remote ID USS up and running as well as the current
LAANC providers.

Grasping at straws.

*Franklin, you recommended a 2 pound exemption for model aircraft but 8 pounds for helicopters (rotary wing).
I don't know a lot about RC helicopters. Why the big difference in weight?

Last edited by ECHO24; 04-24-2020 at 07:07 AM.
Old 04-24-2020, 08:08 AM
  #35  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24 View Post
It's probably too late now for an exempt class of model aircraft, but my thought was something the size of the E-flight
Apprentice or Fun Cub at 3 pounds would fill the need. Franklin's NPRM comment recommends 2 pounds and under,
which would be too low IMO.

Another potential idea. The proposed rule encourages early adoption. A remote ID add-on module is will not comply as
written, but nothing says they could not be used pending the final rule. It might at least demonstrate the feasability of
that option. Presumably, Google will be one of the first to have a remote ID USS up and running as well as the current
LAANC providers.

Grasping at straws.

*Franklin, you recommended a 2 pound exemption for model aircraft but 8 pounds for helicopters (rotary wing).
I don't know a lot about RC helicopters. Why the big difference in weight?
A fixed wing plane, non 3D, eats up a lot more airspace compared to a helo. Plus the helos are generally slower. Of course there are always exceptions, but Iím talking generally.

to be fair, I donít think a single factor is the best way to do it. I think weight plays a factor ... Total Energy (TE) = Potential Energy (PE) + Kinetic Energy (KE) would be a better measure. But from a public policy standpoint, thatís too complex. So weight and type sUAS gets you most of the way there.
Old 04-25-2020, 09:50 AM
  #36  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
A fixed wing plane, non 3D, eats up a lot more airspace compared to a helo. Plus the helos are generally slower. Of course there are always exceptions, but Iím talking generally.

to be fair, I donít think a single factor is the best way to do it. I think weight plays a factor ... Total Energy (TE) = Potential Energy (PE) + Kinetic Energy (KE) would be a better measure. But from a public policy standpoint, thatís too complex. So weight and type sUAS gets you most of the way there.
AMA's 2018 letter to the FAA on remote ID (disregarded in the NPRM) asks for an exemption for under 1 kilogram. Wherever
it went from there it didn't make it into AMA's NPRM comment. Maybe they realized that with an exemption park flyers wouln't
need AMA, or anyone else who didn't want to drive to a flying field.

Whatever the case, lecturing the FAA on "congressionally-mandated requirements" a month after 336 was repealed wasn't
wasn't very bright.


Old 04-25-2020, 12:07 PM
  #37  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24 View Post
AMA's 2018 letter to the FAA on remote ID (disregarded in the NPRM) asks for an exemption for under 1 kilogram. Wherever
it went from there it didn't make it into AMA's NPRM comment. Maybe they realized that with an exemption park flyers wouln't
need AMA, or anyone else who didn't want to drive to a flying field.
No kidding.

Originally Posted by ECHO24 View Post
Whatever the case, lecturing the FAA on "congressionally-mandated requirements" a month after 336 was repealed wasn't
wasn't very bright.
Nor was suing the FAA over their interpretation of the special rule. There's a long list of AMA's strategic blunders....
Old 04-26-2020, 07:21 AM
  #38  
dryverman
My Feedback: (2)
 
dryverman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Proctor, VT
Posts: 240
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24 View Post
Rich Hanson is a symbol of all that's wrong with the AMA, in particular leading AMA's losing battle against
the FAA. Before 336 was repealed, maybe. But after he was flogging a dead horse..

Hanson was also key to bringing in drones, the primary reason for AMA's demise. Drone membership
peaked out at 8% a few years back. For that AMA threw away the entire model aircraft hobby.
The latest AMA election results;
Rich Hanson 6437
Randy Cameron 3298
Eric Williams 2576
Others 457
The totals suggest to me that not enough folks give a damn...
Old 04-26-2020, 11:42 AM
  #39  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24 View Post
Rich Hanson is a symbol of all that's wrong with the AMA, in particular leading AMA's losing battle against the FAA. Before 336 was repealed, maybe. But after he was flogging a dead horse..

Hanson was also key to bringing in drones, the primary reason for AMA's demise. Drone membership
peaked out at 8% a few years back. For that AMA threw away the entire model aircraft hobby.
Originally Posted by dryverman View Post
The latest AMA election results;
Rich Hanson 6437
Randy Cameron 3298
Eric Williams 2576
Others 457
The totals suggest to me that not enough folks give a damn...
What's interesting is that more people voted against him than voted for him. That tells me that if there was just ONE alternative candidate, he could be ousted. Rich Hanson stays in office only because the "anti-Hanson" vote is split among several other candidates. Have only one, and that guy could win.
Old 04-27-2020, 05:09 AM
  #40  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
What's interesting is that more people voted against him than voted for him. That tells me that if there was just ONE alternative candidate, he could be ousted. Rich Hanson stays in office only because the "anti-Hanson" vote is split among several other candidates. Have only one, and that guy could win.

The attached letter from Jim Rice in support of Hanson's induction into AMA's Model Aircraft Hall of Fame gives some
insight into the outsized influence Rich Hanson has had over AMA.

Hason had a hand in creating the position of Director of Government and Regulatory affairs when he took over the
position in 2008 and is the architect of Section 336. The FAA was not pleased that Hanson had gone around them.

That victory getting 336 passed would explain AMA's arrogance with the FAA, and why Hason felt he alone could
interpret Part 107 as requiring forced membership for hobbyists.

With your 2016 letter from the FAA debunking the scheme, I'm sure you are persona non grata in that club.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf
HansonRichardDRich.pdf (68.7 KB, 17 views)
Old 04-27-2020, 07:17 AM
  #41  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by ECHO24 View Post
Hason had a hand in creating the position of Director of Government and Regulatory affairs when he took over the
position in 2008 and is the architect of Section 336. The FAA was not pleased that Hanson had gone around them.

That victory getting 336 passed would explain AMA's arrogance with the FAA, and why Hason felt he alone could
interpret Part 107 as requiring forced membership for hobbyists.

With your 2016 letter from the FAA debunking the scheme, I'm sure you are persona non grata in that club.
Hanson, and by extension the AMA, fell victim to the classic trap - they believed their own rhetoric. That created blind spots. They went around FAA to get 336 (strike 1), then sued the FAA (strike 2), then tried to use 336 to compel membership (strike 3). That exposed their true intentions to FAA, so no wonder FAA pulled the rug out when I asked a simple question.

And since then letís look at AMAís ďresults:Ē 336 is gone. Congress put tight operational restrictions in place. FAA is moving forward with RemoteID. On top of that AMA canít retain existing members let alone get new ones (paying members - the only type that count). That ran a deficit last year, and now COVID. Yet they keep putting good money after bad and even paying bonuses despite the individual not achieving their top priority.

They had EC meeting yesterday, and we wonít see minutes for a month at least. Iím sure The CFO sees the train wreck thatís coming, but nobody else has a clue.
Old 04-27-2020, 08:59 AM
  #42  
flyboy2610
My Feedback: (1)
 
flyboy2610's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 652
Received 30 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
Hanson, and by extension the AMA, fell victim to the classic trap - they believed their own rhetoric. That created blind spots.
I'm sure some of the older crowd remembers Jim Bakker, of PTL and Heritage USA infamy. Jim Bakker spent 8 years in federal prison. After his release, he was interviewed by Cal Thomas. Cal asked him this question: ďWhen did you start to go wrong?Ē
His answer was instructive: ďWhen I began to surround myself with people who told me only what I wanted to hear.Ē
It seems to me that the AMA, along with a good portion of corporate America frankly, could learn an important lesson from Jim Bakker.
Old 04-27-2020, 10:55 AM
  #43  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 10,397
Received 125 Likes on 119 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by flyboy2610 View Post
I'm sure some of the older crowd remembers Jim Bakker, of PTL and Heritage USA infamy. Jim Bakker spent 8 years in federal prison. After his release, he was interviewed by Cal Thomas. Cal asked him this question: “When did you start to go wrong?”
His answer was instructive: “When I began to surround myself with people who told me only what I wanted to hear.”
It seems to me that the AMA, along with a good portion of corporate America frankly, could learn an important lesson from Jim Bakker.
I am old enough to remember that but, unfortunately, there is a big difference between Jim Bakker and Rich Hanson:
Bakker didn't really think he was doing anything wrong and was, more or less, egged on by yes men until he was pulled from his post by law enforcement
Rich Hanson knows exactly what he's doing. No offence to Andy but, until the EC has enough people on it willing to stand up against and stop what's going on, things will continue in the direction they're going until the AMA is a bankrupt memory

Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 04-27-2020 at 11:39 AM.
Old 04-27-2020, 12:04 PM
  #44  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by BarracudaHockey View Post
No conspiracy theories please, there's no rigged elections. Stop propagating that bull please.
When the incumbent uses the organizational levers of power to undermine a competitor for that office, that getting very close to rigging. Let me see ... who did that? Oh yeah, Rich Hanson. He used his column in Model Aviation (using organizational lever of power) to criticize the platform of his competitor for office.

That is slimy at best.... and it was Hanson who did it, without a single protest from the EC.

One more thing ... You directive to "stop propagating that bull..." Is that coming from your authority as an EC member or as a RCU moderator?

Last edited by franklin_m; 04-27-2020 at 01:24 PM.
Old 04-27-2020, 01:36 PM
  #45  
jcmors
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Yankton, SD
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
When the incumbent uses the organizational levers of power to undermine a competitor for that office, that getting very close to rigging. Let me see ... who did that? Oh yeah, Rich Hanson. He used his column in Model Aviation (using organizational lever of power) to criticize the platform of his competitor for office.

That is slimy at best.... and it was Hanson who did it, without a single protest from the EC.

One more thing ... You directive to "stop propagating that bull..." Is that coming from your authority as an EC member or as a RCU moderator?
Andy, I have to agree with Franklin here. I recall seeing Hanson's use of his column in Model Aviation to disparage his competitor for office and it struck me at the time, and still does, to be at the very least, highly unethical. Perhaps not a textbook definition of "rigging" but in my opinion, very very bad form!

Old 04-27-2020, 02:05 PM
  #46  
mongo
My Feedback: (15)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 3,293
Received 64 Likes on 55 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
When the incumbent uses the organizational levers of power to undermine a competitor for that office, that getting very close to rigging. Let me see ... who did that? Oh yeah, Rich Hanson. He used his column in Model Aviation (using organizational lever of power) to criticize the platform of his competitor for office.

That is slimy at best.... and it was Hanson who did it, without a single protest from the EC.

One more thing ... You directive to "stop propagating that bull..." Is that coming from your authority as an EC member or as a RCU moderator?
it would not be the first rigged election in AMA history.
it was tried against Horace Cain a few decades ago. would have worked, if someone had not found the big stack of ballots for Cain stashed behind a file cabinet, or some such place.

that was the reason for the AMA moving to an out of house auditor to receive and count all ballots. a move that has since been done away with, under the folks in leadership positions now days.

Last edited by mongo; 04-27-2020 at 02:06 PM. Reason: grammer
Old 04-27-2020, 04:28 PM
  #47  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Another drama is going to play out when the FAA begins approving FRIAs. Those fields that are rejected don't cease
being flying fields, just that aircraft flown there have to comply with remote ID. Initially, the only aircraft that will comply
are drones able to receive firmware updates, like several from DJI. I can see these droners going after those former
fields for calibration and testing, to practice flying skills, etc. after the model aircraft flyers are kicked out.

If I read the NPRM footnote I posted correctly and the FAA eliminates FPV at AMA fields, those rejected FRIA fields
will also become highly sought after by the affected drone flyers for the same reasons. Talk about poetic justice for
AMA inviting in drones and FPV, if droners start taking over former AMA fields.

Last edited by ECHO24; 04-27-2020 at 07:45 PM.
Old 04-29-2020, 10:13 AM
  #48  
ECHO24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

On the other hand, AMA is well aware there will be 240+ vacant flying fields on day one (rejected FRIAs). I think AMA
will gladly take them on as drone-only flying sites. An even bigger potential market than hobby drones are commercial
drone users who will need those fields to fly and test their equipment.

Hobby registrations have slowed while the rate of 107 registrations had doubled. Commercial users have no choice but
fly legally and comply with remote ID. AMA is also now in the commercial drone insurance business, an obvious conflict
of interest that shows what little regard AMA has for the model aircraft hobby.

With model aircraft flyers FRIA prisoners, AMA can drop pretense of being a model aircraft organization. I predict in a few
years Michael Kranitz' quote, "If it flies without a pilot in the seat, it belongs under the AMA umbrella", will be their tagline.
Old 04-29-2020, 04:42 PM
  #49  
Hydro Junkie
 
Hydro Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 10,397
Received 125 Likes on 119 Posts
Default

I hope not. Nothing could be worse for R/C flying than having to beg the AMA for the right to fly.
That might require me to sell off all my aircraft stuff and stick with building and racing boats and call it good
Old 04-29-2020, 05:09 PM
  #50  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,147
Received 154 Likes on 132 Posts
Default

So when I log onto the AMA site every January to renew my membership I am begging?


Echo, I can see how you were mistaken for Franklin on the other site.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.