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

[Vairtec Corporation]

This round of discussions stemmed from a poll circulated to the chapter 
representatives' list, asking the chapters for their "take" on a 100% 
membership requirement, to assist the board with their evaluation of the 
issue.  At some point it got cross-posted to VV and we were off to the 
races.

So what I did was intentionally set off a bomb, to get everyone (or, 
more correctly, everyone with an interest in the topic) to approach the 
subject from a different angle.  My simple premise was:  If CORSA is to 
require 100% of chapter members to belong to CORSA, then it follows that 
there should be a reciprocal requirement for all CORSA members to belong 
to a chapter.

A local club member who chooses not to belong to CORSA, but who enjoys 
some of CORSA's benefits (insurance protection, event publicity, et al) 
via chapter membership has been called on this list everything from a 
freeloader to a leech.  Sucking, presumably, benefits from CORSA without 
making a financial contribution to CORSA.

Why, then, is a CORSA member who choose not to belong to a local 
chapter, but who enjoys some of the chapter's benefits (local and 
regional events, local and regional tech help et al) not also a 
freeloader and a leech?  Sucking benefits from the chapter without 
making a financial contribution to the chapter.

As it turns out the most popular answer is, not all CORSA members live 
close enough to a chapter to attend meetings.

So apparently we are going to base our decision-making on the likelihood 
that a CORSA member living in a remote area might possibly be one of the 
small percentage of chapter members who in fact attend meetings.  
Apparently we are going to think of chapters only in terms of where they 
meet, not in terms of what activities they conduct and where they might 
conduct them.  Receiving and deriving benefit from the chapter's 
communications apparently does not count.  Having the opportunity to 
discover fellow Corvair enthusiasts living relatively nearby, albeit 
also "too far" from the chapter, apparently does not count.  Encouraging 
inclusiveness at the local and regional level apparently does not count.

Virtually all of us live "too far" to attend CORSA's meeting, held at 
the convention each year and only coincidentally convenient to members 
who live near any given year's convention site.  Using the "too far to 
attend meetings" logic, we may as well all give up our CORSA membership.

Look, I was being somewhat facetious when I brought this up in the first 
place.  My real point was that in my view the issue of 100% membership 
is of relatively minor importance in guiding the future of CORSA.  More 
important is finding the right mix of membership services at the right 
price point and for the size of membership that we are going to have -- 
which is going to be fewer than we have today whether or not we 
institute a 100% membership requirement.

But as president of a chapter that I know would lose members if a 100% 
CORSA membership requirement was imposed, I am serious about the need 
for a reciprocal requirement.

(Oh, and I freely admit -- I love to stir the pot!)

--Bob