No there is only one AGM a year which members vote on items at the meeting. This is the way most operate. During the year you make your input known to your local rep. He may bump it up the line or he may even pole other members in your district/zone and if there is no support he may not push it up the line. Most reps act in step with the majority and stop short of taking on personal agendas. No corporation or association is required to ask permission from the membership to run the organization, rules are in place, a budget is in place, the officers and directors have been voted and approved. Running the business is their job and they do not need to check or supply that info for public consumption. You as a card carrying member can ask for that info but if its felt you may use that info in an attempt to discredit the organization they do not have to disseminate info to you at all.
When you say its to late I ask to late for what your director has voted for or against according to what he feels are the wishes of the majority he represents. If you have a problem with that you have to take it up with your director. You don't get a say in stuff that is day to day operations.

Another fallacy is you keep referring to your dues as our money. Once you pay your dues its no longer YOUR money. Its the cost of membership. If at all you will get one vote that's it majority rules in that case. I belong to two ranges which I pay yearly membership and I get no say in how the range is run. I also belong to a sportsman club and I get one vote at open meetings. I belong to two rc clubs my dues allow me to fly at the fields and gives me one vote at the open meetings. At the proper time and place where I have a vote I may make a motion if I wish to change or amend something. It will need a seconder then a vote by the membership. Pass or fail the majority rules and I can live with that.

I misunderstood the way you characterized how your organization operates.

That said, many organizations in which I'm a member have more robust rules governing the processes by which things are acted upon. AMA has virtually nothing with regard to the level of expenditure that require board approval, let alone membership approval. I guess the difference is whether one believes an organization rest power in the hands of the members or in an oligarchy. AMA clearly believes that power should rest in the hands of the nobility and detached from the unwashed masses. Perhaps that's the reason they're on the financial trajectory they're on. Perhaps it's your very premise, that it's no longer OUR money but THEIR money that's also driving the declining numbers. One can only wonder what it would be like if they put the majority of dues money into clubs where members actually fly than into staff at Taj-Muncie.

I don't know that AMA even has a formal process by which members can formally raise issues, that is in a way that doesn't allow one of the oligarchs to act as a gatekeeper. While it's easy to rationalize this by saying that most of the ideas are crazy, one has to keep in mind that sometimes, just sometimes, that oligarch is wrong. What if that one idea put forward is actually the golden solution ... but the oligarch doesn't understand it or has their own personal reason for not letting it see the light of day. Having a defined process by which one of the elites cannot be the sole gatekeeper on ideas is what protects the organization and ensures that new thinking sees the light of day.

Given many of the criticisms of AMA involve them doing what they've always done and hoping for a different result, it seems like creating a path for new ideas would have merit. But that's probably scary of the nobility ... the oligarchs don't like to share power. Which is why nothing will change for AMA. I'd argue it also explains why FT is growing, and AMA is not (or only barely).

First of all you cannot just throw an idea out there and expect it to be welcomed. If that were the case they would have to have more staff to runabout and that is against what you believe in.

You need to find out how to go about and create change within the rules of engagement. This is the basic format we use for MAAC.

Submissions come as motions, "I have an idea/suggestion" just doesn't cut it and never will make consideration. These motions fall into either a resolution or recommendation. You must know which yours is. Resolutions have to do with the organizations constitution and they will need to pass by a predetermined percent usually 2/3 or 3/4 of the membership. All others will be recommendations which will pass with a simple majority. Here is the tricky part your motion will have to be in writing, no spelling errors and the syntax must be correct and clear on intent and meaning. If it is not it will be returned to the people who made the motion for resubmission next time around. Once the wording/spelling is correct it will need to be voted on. Resolutions tend to be for or against and are enacted within the time constraints per organization. For instance they may take effect at the start of the following year they have been approved. Recommendations that pass may be referred to committee for fine tuning or could be superseded by a similar motion. Look to Roberts Rules for all the ways your motion may get derailed.

Make sure your motion is correctly worded and the intent is clear by working with your Constitutional committee or chairman

You must submit it through your zone/district if it passes then it goes in front of the board or in your case the executive council.

Notice of your motion if it makes it this far should be posted far enough in advance of the meeting so all members have a chance to become familiar with it.

This is another misnomer. A cabal is a group of people who are united in some close design, usually to promote their private views or interests in an ideology, a state, or another community, often by intrigue and usually unbeknownst to those who are outside their group. Sounds more like you guys.

A director/board member can hold and vigorously campaign an opposing position/point of view however once the vote is cast and the majority position is determined that director must stop his campaign and throw his full support behind the majority. If he cannot fully support the direction the organization has chosen he must resign his position rather than cause dissention among the ranks.

For the good of any organization the board has to be seen as a cohesive leadership. This is what you are seeing not some president running roughshod over the executive council.

Drop the pedantic tone. I'm not an idiot that doesn't know how to work within the rules, bylaws, prepare a motion, etc. etc. etc. Many here, including me, have done that and it goes nowhere. There's no report back on status, black hole. And yet the entire time the rhetoric coming out of the nobility is "we need your ideas," or "we need your help," etc. etc. etc. But any number of people in these forums have offered numerous examples of going to AMA with ideas, offers of help, etc. only to. have them go nowhere. I think it's fair to say that most of us see this was "We want your _________ (ideas, help, suggestions, etc.)" ... BUT "... only if it's aligned with what we wanted to do anyway."

Example. They were trying to gain an entree into military Morale Welfare & Recreation (MWR) world. I knew (from experience) that MWR offices aren't really interested unless Active Duty get a discount. Disney gives them, Sea World, heck even ski resorts and such. So I wrote up the formal proposal for discounts. Heck I even advocated to limit them only for E5 and below (typically those that need them most + not quite as much a revenue hit for AMA).

I know, shocking that this dumb-a** country bumpkin retired US fighter-pilot could figure it out without your in depth education on how to submit a proposal as you detailed above - but I submitted it using the process like you described above. It went to the EC and it passed. And you know what? That was YEARS ago. You know what's happened since then? NOTHING. Repeat NOTHING. They never implemented it. And guess what, that MWR entree they sought? It went nowhere as well. My point in this is that even when one gives them what they want, provides insight into what's required, writes up the formal proposal, and it passes - they fall flat when it comes to follow through. And even when they do follow through, they move at glacial pace.

Unfortunately, I'm not the only one. I hope others will chime in with other suggestions and such that they made --- only to see them go nowhere.

Not exactly the type of actions that get people excited about expending discretionary effort ... only to have AMA fail to follow through.

AHHHHH is this along with their refusal to fund your private flying site what has got your knickers in a knot?????? Hell most of the motions I have made didn't go anywhere either didn't bunch my knickers up any. I gave it my best try it didn't work out. By the way it was a recommendation even if it passes doesn't mean it had to implemented. Wasn't it because of the insistence of a discount for all military personal the sticking point? They could not agree so it did not go anywhere? It happens good idea can't come to terms get over it already. Lots of military and ex-military on this forum I don't think many are wringing their hands in sorrow over this.

Nope. As someone who's spent the better part of their life in a high performing / high reliability organization, I have zero tolerance for ineptitude and lack of initiative. In both cases, I saw in first hand. In subsequent actions on other issues, I saw that my experience was not unique. The list is long:

- Attempt to use law to compel membership
- Asking for help establishing flying fields, only to turn down a field over universal access in post 911 world (note 1)
- Continued obfuscation of their true financial status
- Executive compensation growth well above rate of inflation
- Continued growth of staff compensation as percent of total revenue
- Continued losses on magazines, yet no accountability (nobody FIRED)
- INEPT execution of basic staff functions
- INEPT leadership
- Lack of a credible safety management system
- Lack of any accountability for dangerous acts (turbine community comes to mind --- see EC notes from earlier this year)
- Almost deliberate effort by ED and EC to "not see" obvious rule violations right in front of their faces at events

I"m sure there's others, but that's a short list.

- membership down
- income down
- magazine that is not self-supporting
- salaries increasing, despite all measurable metrics on the decline

At what point will you stop being OK with it? When they no longer exist?

Astro

My mistake then thought for sure I heard gnashing of teeth..................

Interesting. The first time you comment, it was simply this:

Then after I write a full response, you CHANGE your original comment .. adding significantly ... all of this:
And even if it was an issue they couldn't come to agreement with MWR, the PROFESSIONAL thing to do would be to provide feedback to the person who made the motion.

But alas, PROFESSIONAL and AMA shouldn't be in the same sentence, ever.

How many years has it been and your still not over it???? my my
Didnt know there were rules when or where one could edit or add to a post.

1. Please cite source rule that limits how long someone can hold opinions before the rule requires them to get "over it?"
2. Considering that their lack of transparency, inept managment, continued loss of money on the magazine, etc. etc. happened as recently yesterday, the answer is less than one.

There isn't. However...

When you make a one sentence comment, and someone quotes that entire comment in a response, that creates an impression in the reader. Namely you said one thing and someone responded to the entirety of what you said.

But when you go back, and retroactively add considerable content to your original comment -- the respondent's original reply now appears to have quoted only a portion of your statement. And that creates a different impression in the reader, namely the reply chose to only address one of your points. That is not true of course, because at the time of your orginal statement, there was only one thing to comment upon.

Again, no rule against it, but it does misrepresent what you said initially, Fortunately the fix is easy, go back and edit your original post to show what was ADDED AFTER other's commented.

Dont feel the need to edit that post I missrepresent nothing besides there is a notice below the post stating it has been edited. If I feel lke editing/adding to my posts so be it. Feel free to edit/add to your reply. It seems you had no problem editing post number 50

Besides look at the time my post was edited. It actually was before your post was entered.

I believe there's a big difference between editing to correct a spelling, punctuation, or spacing error and editing that substantially adds to the record. My edit of post 50 was the former, your edit of post 46 was the latter.

So what? I edited post 50 within 2 minutes of posting. Not sure that's demonstrative of anything.

Let me explain it to you slowly. I edited my post before you even posted your reply DUH!!!!

I wouldn't expect you to understand how a substantive change nearly 15 minutes after the original post is different than spelling / punctuation corrections within 5 minutes of the original post.

You do realize that when people send single vote write-ins like former POTUS or something similar, they're mocking AMA.

I see they've updated the webpage to include full vote details. Can't believe there's so much resistance to transparency that the first reaction is to post less rather than more. Publishing more only when called on it.

So what is your point or lack thereof. I didn't mean ta stump ya come on Franklin keep up.
Really could care less about how you think someone should post.
Maybe you should put a guide or something like Frank's guide to public posting.

For those that care about such things the page has been updated with the full results.
https://www.modelaircraft.org/ama-or...ection-results

Franklin did I read correctly that you have not joined a club in 10 years. Are you a member in good standing of the AMA or have you let that lapse as well?

Well, given that I've said multiple times that I've got access to the EC minutes, you're a smart guy - figure it out.

As for clubs, yes. No use for them, at least those locally. As someone who doesn't have a Freudian need to fly big things, clubs in area have little value for me. Combination of high cost, substandard facilities (mostly no paved runway) in closest club, and distance / time to get to/from. It's about 15 miles one way, plus time to unpack, set up, wait for the 3D types to stop hovering 25 feet in front of flight stations, etc. So I'm happy to fly smaller stuff that I can operate within 100 yards of my house, spend that $100 year in club fee savings on planes, radios, and batteries. Nearly $1000 in savings so far that's gone into this and other discretionary spending hobbies. Not to mention gas costs. Plus I don't have to deal with the social crap. When I go to fly, I go to fly. Not socialize. If I want the latter, I go to a bar. And if by some chance I develop a "need" to fly bigger stuff, I just drive out to my cabin and fly off a dirt road out there (which by the way is smoother than the "club" field).

I see where this is going.....next we will see prop making motion to ban Franklin from AMA membership! Oh, wait....prop isn't even an AMA member!! LOL I gotta hand it to ya prop, for all of the yelling and screaming you do in here about people just whining and not doing anything, you have ZERO skin in the game, yet here you are..... :)

Yep but he knows what is happening at every AMA club field around the country. Of course it’s a “ Freudian “ need to have large airplanes but apparently not to boast about a very rare and expensive Brandy or to throw out Naval Commander retired in just about every thread. I wonder what the appropriate title is for someone who makes up a fictitious name to enter a site that kicked him out to do spread lies?

Astro riding in on his white horse to deflect the question in 5…….4…….3……2……

I think everyone now notices how I have mentioned the troll account and lies several times now and also notice how Astro always comes to the rescue and Franklin hasn’t said A single word about it. Kinda what we expect from those two. Astro feels perfectly justified in calling people Narcissistic etc and defends his rudeness by stating “ observed personality traits “ of course when one mentions the observation of his unwavering devotion to Franklin it’s called out as a slur. Classic example of hypocrisy.

Franky come on how hard would it be for one of the minions to either let you use their log on or copy and past the info for you? Not that you have but you haven't answered the question now have you? As it remains unanswered it appears we are seeing your delightful little two step avoiding a direct answer. Lets try it again. Are you presently a member in good standing of the AMA? After all in your next statement there doesn't seem to be anything that you would find that would compel you to join?

Wow I can see why you don't belong to a club. Only speculation on my part but usually the reception you receive is proportionate to how you present yourself to the club membership. Could it be possible your reception has been lacking because the impression you left was also lacking.

AMA member years ago when I first started flying in the USA let it go when I became aware I was covered better with the Reciprocal Agreement. Still bought the mag from my US hobby shop though because I enjoy reading it.

FAA member when it first was required. Renewed so its still current.

When the reciprocal agreement ended Joined AMA and took the Trust test.

I have visited the USA 3 times now to retrieve packages at my mailbox that have been held since Sept 2020, to visit my favorite hobby shop and to visit friends and fellow flyers I haven't seen for well over a year now. I am all set to go flying now as soon as the opportunity presents itself.

Anything else I can help you out with instead of you speculating wildly about me????

As far as attempting to get Franky banned from the AMA its not my concern let him be his own reason for any action taken by the AMA. Besides he skips around the answer when asked if he's even a member in good standing. If he isn't then there would be no way to ban him would there?

See above.


Or - it could be exactly as I say: I don't have a Freudian need to fly big planes, don't like to spend money on things that don't provide value commensurate with the money spent, and/or I prefer flying over socializing.

Come on don't you find it entertaining when he latches on to a new word. Almost like Spelling with Darnell. Take for instance his latest one Dithspickable kinda reminds me of Daffy Duck

The beauty of my country is that I don' have to answer your question if I choose not to answer.

My whole point is why would you want to ban somebody simply for having an opinion. Shows your true colors right there.

Since you actually replied, I will gladly retract my incorrect statement and acknowledge that you are an AMA member. Did you join as a full member, or did you join under the new affiliate member thing? Does an affiliate member enjoy full membership benefits i.e. voting?

Astro

Absolutely I'm just wondering if your someone with a stake in the organization or like a few other none members on here just outsiders throwing feces at the door.

Well, you can just keep wondering.

I, on the other hand, will continue to expend my discretionary time as I see fit.

Didn't say I wanted to ban anyone did I? Franklin may prove to be the reason for his own fate so be it. Besides your the one who brought up banning Franklin not me. This is beyond cherry picking its putting false words in someone's mouth even worse than an outright lie.

A Canadian cannot join as a full member of the AMA just as an AMA member cannot join MAAC as a full member. Keeps the association from being accused of raiding members. Associate members usually do not enjoy voting privileges, hold office etc. It allows them to participate at fields, clubs and events like we did in the past. I cannot put forth motions which might make it extremely difficult to get anyone banned. If I join a club in the US it will depend on the club rules if I am allowed to vote or hold office in that club. A friend who spends the winter in Florida is a club flying instructor so I think it would depend on the club.

How about an answer rather than your usual deflection? I would simply call it another account. If one's account has been banned, I would say opening a new account is just that, an account. One account, one voice. A "troll" or "sock puppet" account would be when a member opens two accounts simultaneously and uses them to act as two different people in order to further the agenda of one or both of the personas. Pretty simple. In fact, I would say that the way you and prop operate on here, with your tag-teaming and building off of each others' snide comments and personal attacks of Franklin and I, would be a more accurate portrayal of how a, "sock puppet" operates.

"come to the rescue"? Nah, just pointing out your spin, bias and eagerness to use your relationship with moderators to have someone you disagree with silenced. Franklin has treated you no worse than you treat him in these forums, yet his account gets closed? If you can't see the hypocrisy in that, you are only fooling yourself.

I have zero devotion to Franklin. You and prop can claim that all you want, but it simply doesn't make it so. There are plenty of things that Franklin and I disagree on, but they are simply disagreements of opinion, not the factless, baseless and emotionally-charged personal attacks that you and prop sling constantly.

Boy, the narcissistic comment sure touched a nerve. Is narcissistic a rude adjective? Or is it, as you say, simply a word that has a meaning? Is it rude to call a narcissist, a narcissist? I think not. "defend my rudeness"? LOL Let's break your spin down, shall we? You alluded that calling you a narcissist was some kind of personal attack, so I provided a definition of the word and said that your posts and behavior on these forums supports that. It was not, "defending my rudeness" at all, simply providing context and justification and taking responsibility for my statements. Something that you and prop never do.

Astro

No, you did not, it was speculation on my part based on your statements on these threads over the last few years. You have made strong statements like, "Why would the AMA put up with his crap?". It is pretty easy to see what the intent of a statement like that is. I'll break it down for you: A member pays dues and follows the rules, there is zero recourse AMA can take on said member. The only other option is to assume it is your opinion that if an organization simply doesn't like somebody, they actually have the power to expel them. Again, pretty simple.

You've made a lot of statements here lately using the disclaimer, "pure speculation on my part" followed by some wild concoction of your imagination, with zero basis in reality. Do you REALLY believe that is any different than what you claim is "cherry picking" and "putting false words in someone's mouth"? C'mon, man!

Astro

Don't know if I would call anyone here "Dethpicable" but you are all pathetic and I feel sorry for you because you can not do anything except find faults with one another. Life is too short to argue over senseless things as you all do. Today I was reading some of what John Wesley wrote, such as “I exact more from myself, and less from others. Go thou and do likewise!” you should do the same.

I think you need to check, the AMA is a private dues collecting organization. Your membership is an application which can be refused. And I still don't know why they put up with this crap except you guys must be so far down the We Dont Give a Shid list its just easier to ignore you. Which after all might be the best policy.

I'm relieved you didn't find fault with us and were compelled to share your sorrow. I'll sleep much better tonight.

Astro

Invoking a theologian, who flouted many of the existing regulations of the church in which he belonged, in order to insult others is hardly compelling.

Care to extrapolate, or is this another of your vague statements that you hope we will guess what you mean and then dance around and claim, "I never said that". Why don't you just specifically list the egregious actions you think deserve to be used as a basis to be put on the AMA's, "we don't give a shid" list, or used to discriminately be denied membership?

Astro