Another Example: Lack of Transparency
 

AMA has ample opportunities to be transparent, but for some reason they choose not to do that. Here's another example. Notice lack of information other than the here's who won ...

a.k.a. ... "Trust Us!"

No numbers on ballots sent per position
No numbers on ballots returned per position
No counts for ALL candidates (winners AND non-winners)
No details....

From their public facing web page (appended below):
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rcu...af259a0a8d.png


https://www.modelaircraft.org/ama-or...ection-results

This is not unusual at a corporate level. I get several reports from different corporations I hold shares in. I don't get the kind of details you list the only thing I get are the results like those posted by the AMA. Are you accusing/insinuating wrong doing by the AMA re these elections?

Another example of sensationalism.

Only one of those districts, X in this case, was an actual election, Eric, Jay, Lawrence and Gary all ran unopposed

In 2020 they posted more detailed results:
https://www.modelaircraft.org/execut...ection-results

In 2019 they posted more detailed results:
https://www.modelaircraft.org/execut...ection-results

In 2018 they posted more detailed results:
https://amablog.modelaircraft.org/bl...ction-results/

In 2017 they posted more detailed results:
https://amablog.modelaircraft.org/blog/2017/11/

In 2016 they posted more detailed results:
https://amablog.modelaircraft.org/bl...ction-results/

But again, when given the opportunity to be fully open and transparent, and despite posting more detailed each time prior, they decided to go the opposite direction.

When past practice for last several years has been to include full results, it is hardly sensational to note when they suddenly stop doing it.

So what? Reporting actual vote numbers would be transparent. But alas, each time the AMA has a chance to be transparent, they choose otherwise.

Since you asked nicely

The only contested result was
GREG STONE 1363
BARRY MATTISON 758
Several with 1 write in vote

The unopposed received around 750 to 800 with a smattering of single vote write-in's including Donald Trump getting a vote here and there.

:) Hi Franklin,

I'm left wondering if SO few of our fellow members actually bothered to vote that reporting the numbers would be an embarrassment to our organization for lack of participation? Of course, unopposed elections seldom bring the voters out in droves.

Yet another reason I'd like to see the vote tabulation handled by an independent firm VS in house, if participation is as dismal as I believe it may have been perhaps reporting the results may encourage more to vote*

* Yeah,yeah, I know, right about when Hell begins serving iced tea....... :o

And Andy beat me to the post by seconds........ ;)

I appreciate that, but why do they just refuse to publish info in the first place? Why not just be open and transparent without being asked? Is it that difficult? Hint: It shouldn't be.

So assume 800 for each of the four unopposed elections, plus a shade over 2,000 for the one contested election, and you have 5,200 out of 100,000 members casting votes. Hardly a model of engagement. So perhaps you're right.

Yep. And the smaller the numbers, the easier it is to "influence" the outcome. Hence greater reason for OUTSIDE tabulation.

Also, AMA structures the requirements to run for office in a way that virtually ensures you get homogeneous thinking even when they're contested. And as noted in another thread, even IF someone slips through that dares to question the prevailing views of the sitting cabal, then the President and the EVP will use their columns in the organization's official publication to drive encourage votes against you (in favor of views that align with theirs). I still cannot believe the remaining EC members have not sanctioned them for doing that. But then again, if the other EC members were also stakeholders in preserving status quo, then that explains a lot. All carefully structured and operated to keep the unwashed masses at bay. "How can we dare even contemplate alternative views? Those are dangerous to our control!"

I think most of us just want to play with our toy airplanes not so much interested in the politics.

I’ve followed AMA elections for quite a while now and 6% voter turnout is about the norm, unfortunately.

This also aligns with Speedy’s comment that the majority of the membership doesn’t care.

The way Speedy presented that though, presumed that, “Nobody cares, so Franklin should just let it go” (paraphrasing due to the vague but suggestive nature of speedy’s posts), which couldn’t be further from the truth. It’s another logical fallacy. Just because the majority of members are not engaged, does not mean that the AMA should be held accountable and still do what’s best for the majority. It does not give them free reign to dictate however they see fit.

Astro

Again nothing will satisfy this group short of a hostile take over. Something has put a burr under Franky's saddle and it just seems he's out to get even. One day they will get fed up and just refuse to take his membership?

Your right that is why this will never come to pass as none of them have the intestinal fortitude to learn how to do something as simple as getting on the agenda for consideration. A letter to the board means nothing and could not even be considered (that is what is meant by unsolicited suggestions}

Andy do the meetings operate under Roberts Rules For Meetings? Your organization is quite large do you actually meet? How many times a year? If so how do recommendations and amendments make it on the agenda?

Funny. You are the only person who mentioned hostile takeover, yet you claim that is what would satisfy Franklin.

I find it disgusting that you are able to make statements like that out one side of your mouth, all while claiming Franklin is guilty of slander?

Are you even aware how deep your hypocrisy runs?

Again never mentioned anyone's name re hostile take over more cherry picking and creative editing on your part LOL

And again point out where I claim he slandered anyone exact wording now no cherry picking or creative editing which seems to be your forte.

Everybody here knows what you said, who you were talking about and what you meant. You may think you are crafty and cute, but you fool nobody.

your lack of accountability for the crap you type here is despicable as well.

Astro

Well maybe not everybody and I really wasn't trying to fool you either. Dithpicable new word of the day?????

Yes, Roberts Rules
Yes, quarterly though they are now virtual or hybrid where we can chose to attend. The President can call a special meeting if there's something time sensitive to deal with.

Wouldn't it be nice if lowly members were allowed to attend virtually?

By attend do you mean observe only? I dont know how it could work if large numbers insisted on participation as well.

Well, my lowly HOA managed to figure it out. My former employer had thousands of people on a monthly all hands meeting. So it's possible. If they must, limit it to the first 1000 who sign up or something like that.

But I forget, opening up meetings for lowly unwashed masses to attend would mean a willingness to be transparent. And we can see how AMA recoils at virtually every opportunity to be transparent.

Are members allowed to attend?

Yes, members can attend

I don't know why you just can't give a normal answer without throwing your perverbial dig at the AMA. You wonder why you are ignored.

Are members observers only or can they participate from the floor?

Observers unless they are there for a specific agenda item, such as JPO being there to discuss a turbine issue for example.

Observers are allowed under regular circumstances, are they allowed to observe the zoom meetings as well?

Astro

That was my next question I have attended zoom meetings and someone has to sign you in when you request joining. The possibility of having to sign in thousands .......or is there an open portal for observation only

These quarterly meetings are to attend to the daily buisness of running the orgaization re items that do not require member voting. Do you have an annual general meeting AGM where members can have thier motions put forth for consideration.

There's an annual membership meeting where we discuss open questions, it used to take place at Joe Nall, there's also one at the National Fly In and I've done district level one at Perry Swap Meet.

So, members can or cannot join the quarterly zoom meetings?

Not likely thousands would show up. I was on the board of an HOA and no one showed up for the open board meetings. If anyone did, on a few occasions, they would leave soon after the meeting began because it was too boring for them.

If AMA had open meetings I expect the only ones who might be there would be the four of you that only argue about the same thing over and over.

I guess we're doing pretty well then. Our HOA has 85 owners, and we typically get 30+ at our meetings. Why? Three reasons: We made it easy. Genuinely listen to their concerns (even when we don't like what we hear), and then take PROMPT action.

What a concept!

Kind of works like it is intended, no? Group elects folks to do their bidding, the elected, in turn, provide an open forum for their constituents to communicate their opinions so they know how to do their job and what is expected of them by the electorate, they take action and report back to their constituents. MIND BLOWN!!

I honestly do not understand and cannot comprehend how the seeming majority of citizens believe that we elect a President to be a dictator to rule however they see fit......

Astro

Or the majority feel that the management is doing a proper job and are satisfied with the results of the leadership.

That's OK too.

Yours is constructed a bit different than others I belong to. For instance at MAAC regular board meetings like your Quarterlies are for regular items that are day to day concerns, members don't vote your representative does after all that's what you voted him in for. Once a year there is a meeting where changes to the policy/constitution, bylaws etc. get put before the membership for approval. These are either recommendations or resolutions. At this meeting the voting is by the general membership either in person or via proxy with the board member carrying the number of votes in his district by default unless a person has designated otherwise or attends in person. No motions are accepted from the floor as the members need notice of the motions on the docket. These are published 30 days prior to the meeting so every member can make an informed decision. To be considered a motion must be submitted, voted on and approved at a single district/zone meeting then its passed on for consideration at the AGM.

Simple form: Motion submitted by member at large at district/zone meeting, needs seconder, voted on if passing goes to the AGM for vote by general membership.

How do you do this at the AMA?

I would disagree with that based on my experience that those who do not engage, do not really know what is going on, hence they know not what they are, "OK" with.

Go to You Tube and see how many people do not know who our President or VP of the USA are. I do not believe that the opinions of those who choose not to engage and bury their head in the sand, hold any real relevance or value to the greater good, or their own, for that matter. All of the freedoms we enjoy require each individual to be engaged and take some personal responsibility, not simply reap the benefits, else our system will ultimately fail. Have you watched the news lately?

Astro

Well I'm "OK" with that.

I guess I am asking if someone wants a motion to be considered at the national level how does one go about that?

For those of you the AMA holds its meetings according to Roberts Rules so here is the condensed version.
Attachment 2271146

What you describe is an organization that SAYS it wants input from membership and then ACTIONS MATCH the rhetoric.

What AMA does is SAY they want input, but then only allow them to make formal inputs once a year. The rest of the year the board does what it wants. And since they're slow (and getting slower) to post what they did, it means by the time members find out, it's too late.