Re: ARSA info request for Izzy

Jerry Arvin wrote:
> Leadership that is about/under a year old is impossible to be considered 
> entrenched.

Oh?  How can the leadership be changed?  Can it?

> An organization that publishes EVERYTHING is not using secrecy.

EVERYTHING?  WHAT?  The organization has no infrastructure.  It exists in the 
ether. What it does publish is subject to revision (e.g. the Memorial Day 
warnings and the subsequent "getting legal" advice).  I would like detailed 
information from ARSA on the progress and plans for their legislative 
initiative.  I would like to know the strategy (including timing) so I can 
decide for myself if I will contact my representatives to support that 
initiative.  Don't redirect me about other organizations communications, we're 
talking ARSA here.

> An organization with exclusively member input and NO BOD clearly has 
> "better" member input.

Input maybe, use of that input remains to be seen.  Me yelling a  tree in the 
middle of a forest is providing plenty of input.  So far the trees have not 
responded.

> Straight forward questions answered with straight forward answers, but 
> ignored by moronic trolls is not "avoiding the subject".

Like changing almost every thread into an rant about how nobody likes to play 
with poor little Jerry and how those big boys down the street are being mean 
to you?  Or avoiding questions by redirecting them into attacks on other 
organizations?

Straight forward responses like:
" this is what distinguishes ARSA
it is based on a premise that rocketry is good, you are all responsible
enough to explore it through use of any legal materials, and that we as
members have a stake in determining the legal status of materials we'd
like to use."

There is no substance there.  It is a grand idea with absolutely nothing to 
back it up.  It also sounds distressingly like statements the "militia" folks 
would make.

> A person withan unspecified term cannot be a dictatorfor life.

Why not?  The term is open-ended, right?

> A person who has not even had a plurality of members suggest an election 
> even though that option is always on the table cannot be a dictator for 
> life.

How do we know WHAT the members suggest?  How can I bring up an item for 
member consideration?

> A person who is not a dictator or singularly steers the direction of the 
> "group" cannot be a dictator.
>
> A person proud and encouragingof member input cannot be considered to 
> "brag about the lack of member input". The concepts are diametrically 
> opposite.

I must have missed that "communication to member" note.  Or was I supposed to 
seek it out?

> Acknowledge receipt of this information into your brain.

It's in there.  But I'm trying to expunge it.

> Post my receipt.

You owe me $1000 for consulting.  Would you like a formal receipt?


--
Alex Mericas