OpsNormal
You got it in one, one of the many things for which I was vilified ("you're only interested in the big-end of town", whatever that means ? ) was suggesting that to be relevant, AOPA needed to re-engage with the professional organisations, literally get up out of the weeds and be the industry leader it was.
Or as you so aptly put it;
I wanted to see if the grass-roots of the animal would let the head out of its butt which has surely not seen the light of day for a long long time.....
My compadres and I agree entirely with;
From the outside.... Your organisation claims to speak for GA as a whole. This claim is unfounded, wrong and arrogant in its extreme. You do not speak for me, you do not speak for my company, my workmates, and from the feeling that I have been able to ascertain from talking to other people in the industry is that the arrogance of past few years has done you no favours with the very people who work in this industry you would need to be attracting to become members of your organisation.
It used to and in fact I believe it was actually started by industry professionals.
Certainly AOPA US do so.
I know you guys stopped listening yonks ago.
I suspect the reason they will not engage with or encourage professional and experienced members to join, who actually know how it works, is that they would be very quickly defrocked, their "huff 'n puffer" taken away and lose their own personal soapbox.
Last I heard, there were moves being discussed, I believe, to contract the "member services" even further, to move to the back of a Directors demountable, go to a newsletter format, ban directors from out of Sydney (kidding? not really, one suggested that WA, NT and SA could not support or justify on a membership basis their own Director, let alone VPs and Pres's ), and other really member satisfying moves.
And they still expect Canberra to take them seriously.
I see
brianh is still in sophist mode..
Remember;
6,000 ex members can't be wrong
nor the as you put it
the 6,000 others who didn't join