<VV> Bob's (typically different) viewpoint on 100%

[Vairtec Corporation]

I wrote:
>> If CORSA is to impose a requirement of 100% membership from its local
>> club members, then I assert that it must be reciprocal:  CORSA must
>> likewise impose a requirement of 100% local club membership from its
>> national members.
>>     
Bruce Schug then asked:
>> I don't really disagree with you but I don't know why this is  
>> important. Why do you feel so strongly about it?
>>     

A few reasons.  First, as we have seen from the ongoing debate, a 100% 
membership requirement from CORSA has the potential to drive members out 
of the local clubs while, it is anticipated, increasing CORSA's 
membership numbers.  Why should a policy be enacted to benefit CORSA at 
the expense of the locals?  Second, just as persons have argued that it 
is abnormal for a parent organization not to have 100% membership at the 
local level, it is abnormal for a national organization not to require 
membership in a local.

But also this:  If CORSA members were required to join a local club, the 
vitality of the local clubs would be enhanced.  Even persons who live a 
considerable distance from the nearest local club would benefit from 
receiving a newsletter (be it paper or electronic), they would begin to 
interact with fellow Corvair owners living closer to them than they 
realized, they would begin to "network" and enhance the hobby as a 
whole.  There is no downside.

Again, I am not hung up on the necessity of a 100% membership 
requirement, but if there is to be one it must be reciprocal.

--Bob