<VV> VirtualVairs Digest, Vol 56, Issue 56

[Tim Verthein]

Whoa! First we argue about 100% membership requirement, then it's suggested that the national club collect the local dues for them, too? sure, the clubs will love taking away their control of their finances.  I assume then that the national organization would come up with some way tO disburse these funds promptly to the chapters so they may operate their clubs?

Holy crap, that's on the road to being a military state!  Cripes, as it is, when someone joins Corsa it takes a month or two to even get a membership card (and nothing else, BTW) and now you want them screwing with 100+ chapters dues money! Egad.

Reading VV again is starting to scare me.

Tim in Bovey


Subject: <VV> membership requirements
To: "Virtual Vairs" <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
Cc: CORSA BoD <corsabod at corvair.org>
Message-ID: <380-22009928141053687 at earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

All,

Though I personally would in theory support 100% membership for chapters, I
also see the potential hazards in making it mandatory. That is why I
proposed a voluntary system, involving the national collecting the local
dues. Think about it, people. If CORSA were to offer that service, locals
could have that system take care of their CORSA members, while only having
to collect local dues (on the sly?) for those who didn't belong to CORSA.
They would know positively who they are, and may be able to more
effectively win them over. Chapters (like the special interest groups)
could use the system and not have to worry about collecting dues, period.
And those chaptes who wanted to have 100% CORSA membership only also
wouldn't have to mess with collecting dues. Plus an added benefit to ALL
chapters is that they would probably pick up "new" members from other areas
who wanted to join their local for whatever reason. This last point has
been proven the case in that club in which I belong that uses this system.

I wonder if anyone has thought about this. Such a system would benefit
everyone. There would be no negative effect (beyond more bookwork for the
national office) and much positive benefits for everyone. What I don't
understand is why the board refuses to even try it out. Can any of the
board members give me their reason(s)?