Re: action: stirring the pot

Alex Mericas wrote:
<< 1. Do we really need 2 national organizations?>>

I think so, yes. If anything, it gives malcontents a place to go. If you don't
like NAR, you can join TRA; and if you don't like TRA, you can join NAR.
Besides, there are several subtle differences in the two organizations. To
some, these difference may not seem important but to others they might be very
important.

<<1a What does TRA provide that NAR doesn't (EX and an easier L3 process is all
I can see)>>

For many, EX is a very big selling point in TRA's favor. For others, it doesn't
matter. A few even consider it a detriment. That's why it's useful to have two
(or more) organizations.

<<2. Do we have the right 2 organizations?>>

We have a right to as many as people want. 

<<I suspect that the vast majority of people in this hobby don't care one bit
about organizational politics.  All they want to do is enjoy the hobby.  To
them, the primary role of the national organizations is to provide insurance.
>>

I would say there are two primary roles: Providing insurance, and providing
representation/collective bargaining in the regulatory process. Personally, I
think the second is far more important than the insurance.