If deemed necessary, reported comments will be removed within 7 - 10 days but usually sooner. Please submit this report ONLY if you STRONGLY believe this needs to be removed. Multiple illegitimate reports slow down the administrative process of removing the actual and more seriously unfavorable content.

Poster Name:
no

Poster Message:
Many good issues raised in posts here. Alot to think about. I hear you on the issue of the national and its rules. What I do find hard to understand though is that in general there exists a compromise position to solve most issues EVEN with rules that works for both parties (the old win win scenario). Looking at the situation from the perspective of the National I am baffled why they would give up a perpetual income stream from CAL from dues and other fees (and alumni dues etc.) because no agreement could supposedly be reached on the real estate. I can only guess that the National wasn't thinking long term (and wasn't certainly concerned with existing local members) and was just interested in the real estate or exerting control for whatever reason. The insertion of the 10 year period for limited changes by the National regarding the real estate was also quite curious as I'm not sure if that made people feel good or not (personally I think its highly suspicious as to the motives of the National but that is just me!). As an outsider its hard to figure the whole thing out but I can't make the argument work from the perspective of the National at all as by doing what they have done they have lost a chapter and all that entails, alienated alumni and brought scrutiny to themselves which given their behavior in this case and others probably isn't a wise PR move! I'm still confused except for the scenario where National wanted to prove its point at any cost. Strange.