Well there goes my dreamteam – Gaunt doesn’t like McKeown. However, that’s based on Gaunt’s understanding of who’s responsible for the push to reduce the number of Board members. Perhaps he may change his mind.
I’ll say it again – 11 on a board of an organisation of this kind is in my view too many. 5 max. It’s all well and good having state ‘chapters’ or some other entrenched representation, but the fundamental problem on that front is that AOPA doesn’t know who it represents!
LeadSled – my post was centrally relevant to the point I was making in comparing and contrasting the lobbying methods and success of AOPA and the AUF.
Yours is a very telling post. It points up exactly why AOPA has alienated itself from its natural (and claimed) constituency. You simply dismiss as irrational the views of people you identify as members of the flying training industry. You think a proposal has merit, therefore their opposition is irrational. Did it ever occur to you that they might not take kindly to paying AOPA to tell them they’re irrational? Did it ever occur to you that if they were ever members of AOPA, AOPA’s job might have been to do what they want it to do? And last but not least, do you ever entertain even the remotest possibility that they might be right, and you wrong?
Woomera – Any more news as to why the previous tranche of posts was moved to admin, and when it might return?