>And by what means would the AERC have to
take any punitive action against a non-member? How would the AERC take any
santions against them, take away thier non existant
points?
Remove them from completion, just as one would any other
rider. Which in turn moves up all the other riders behind them.
>I seem to remember a few years back when the financial
well being of the AERC was in question and we were discussing raising dues,
our members were not happy about the amount it was going to be raised. And if
I remember correctly the non-member dues were raised also to partially offset
raising our dues. It seems only fair if the paying members fees were raised,
that we would raise the amount non-members were paying also. The AERC is a
buisness and has to maintain a budget and increase cash flow in order to grow
and to be able to supply us with the services we require and want. And I see
absolutely nothing morally wrong with non-members helping us hold down the
cost of our dues. $10.00 in todays economy is not much for most to pay to
enjoy our sport.
Yes, AERC should be run as a business--and it is a sloppy shortcut to
take punitive action against non-members rather than making the organization
sufficiently attractive so that people want to join. (Personally, I
think it IS worth joining--but that many people don't understand the
benefits--poor communication on our part.)
I've pretty much given up on this subject as it has become a part of the
status quo, but adding a non-member fee was not one of AERC's finer
moments.
Heidi
