Guest guest Posted April 13, 2004 Report Share Posted April 13, 2004 Message: 1 Mon, 12 Apr 2004 12:12:57 EDT acudoc11 Re: Re: TCM Future - anti trust & fda Attilio - David S. <<This group is great and it serves a good cause but when it comes to issues of suppression such as are being experienced world-wide......and some wish to hide behind etiquette.........there is nothing much else to say other than maybe there should be a specialized group where these things can be spoken about openly. There are 'key' people who have contacted us back-channel and we are working toward getting the correct job accomplished and for that alone we should all be thankfull.>> Richard, From my point of view what is most troubling about your posts is stated in the line above: " A few key people " You are running an organization that accepts no input except for your vision (and those that support it). There is no communication base and no way for individuals to have their voices heard in your organization. You collect no dues, so you say you are doing this great work for all of 'our benefit' and representing everyone. BUT basically you are promoting yours (and a few key people's agenda). I have no complaint with this, but understand that when an organization truely represents it's members there are innumerable compromises and issues that must be factored into any and all actions and decisions. That type of filtering process definitely dilutes a hard edge, but is neccessary to bring large groups together. That said, I would appreciate that as you continue to do your fine work as you see fit, that you stop attempting to tear down other individuals or organizations for doing the work that they do. In the end everyone will benefit. robbee fian L.Ac. It is a safe bet that all practitioners will enjoy reaping the benefits when the issues are properly handled. But while the battle is in process they don't wish to hear about it nor about what must be experienced in winning the battled. If they so choose to stay ignorant....so be it. Anyone else who wishes to stay in contact can do so...you all have our e-mail. In this way we won't bore or expose the rest to that part of the real world. Richard >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2004 Report Share Posted April 13, 2004 Hi Robbee At 03:06 PM 4/13/2004, you wrote: >Richard, From my point of view what is most troubling about your posts is >stated in the line above: " A few key people " You are running an >organization >that accepts no input except for your vision (and those that support >it). There >is no communication base and no way for individuals to have their voices >heard in your organization. Wrong..... we take input everyday .... from members and non-members alike... just like this from you. > You collect no dues, so you say you are doing this >great work for all of 'our benefit' and representing everyone. BUT basically >you are promoting yours (and a few key people's agenda). True leadership is to lead ... while it tends to be a " few key people " that are active we are glad to hear from everyone who wants to tell us what they think. We do listen... but we lead ... as in the area of the current FDA mess. Turns out we were right on the money... but we took in all the other ideas and spent many a night discussing the matter. >I have no complaint with this, I am glad to hear it! >but understand that when an organization truely represents it's >members there are innumerable compromises and issues that must be factored >into any >and all actions and decisions. Yes, the Horse built by committee ... turns out to look like a Camel. It is the current model other associations use ... and that is fine. I have worked in that model ... and well... what has happen over the last few years speaks louder then me. There is always a large number who do not like the outcomes... but that all there was... >That type of filtering process definitely >dilutes a hard edge, but is neccessary to bring large groups together. Ah... now the point.. the hard edge...John Jay Chapman. He said, " People who love soft words and hate inequity forget that reform consists in taking a bone from a dog. " One of the truisms in life, at least from my experience, is that, if you're not in a dogfight you're not engaging in reform, and nothing will truly change. > > >That said, I would appreciate that as you continue to do your fine work as >you see fit, Thank you we appreciate it. > that you stop attempting to tear down other individuals or >organizations for doing the work that they do. Speaking for myself .. I don't ... I am sure Richard will address this issue his way, but he may not feel that is what he is doing. >In the end everyone will benefit. >robbee fian L.Ac. Yes, even our small " key group " ;-) David Sontag Co-Founder of the AOMNC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2004 Report Share Posted April 13, 2004 I know the ANOMC gets a lot of input from practitioners daily, the ANOMC is constantly asking for opinions and suggestions for the good of Oriental Medicine I have seen the ANOMC respond positively to input. I have never seen the AAOM respond to any issue in a positive way. Other than taking care of their inner circle. Dan Martin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2004 Report Share Posted April 14, 2004 robbee So nice to hear from you after all these years. You make a supposition that 'posts' have anything to do with 'effective action'. As to the 'vision'.....all coalition members are welcome to take themselves out of the membership rolls the same way they signed on. Therefore we don't control any of the members unlike other organizations that are tied to fee for membership. One of the compromises and issues that was factored into creating such an organization as the national coalition was exactly what you point to. Thats why the mission statement was and still is posted. The vote for membership is based upon one's own voluntary action by joining and is not tied to fee for membership or any other basis. People need to see that other ways of operating a membership.... although it appears they have a say.....that say is very small in reality. Thats a fact...not a judgement. And you would have the reality of that unseen or suppressed? The greatest benefit will come from what is not hidden. The practitioner audience and memberships of all organizations need to see and understand all of the complex issues. What to you is tearing down is nothing more than an analysis and exposure of what is happening. The judgement whether what each organization is doing or accomplishing is up to the practitioners. What you refer to as 'not liking' is one response to the learning-of those activities by others who are not in the inner sanctum. A 'few key' people was a reference to others outside AOMNC..... so the attempt to say that it is only our view is incorrect and misleading. The coalition's communication with its members couldn't be any more effective or open as you saw from Pam Black's comments in this group. She is entitled as a member of the coalition to very easily opt out as she wishes and we don't control that. The members are free to come and go based on whatever they like or don't like about the organization's activities or if they got up on the wrong side of the bed that morning. One could say that we actually have a much more volatile membership fluctuation than an organization that charges an annual fee for membership. At the end of every day....we know how many members we have. By the model of typical association business (either for-profit or not-for-profit) there is an assumption that large groups NEED to be brought together. Depends on for what purpose. Anyone who has been in any association knows that the large group membership really doesn't have that much to say. It is always the small group called a Board that in effect makes all the decisions. Supposedly based upon yet another small group who got them elected. So what we see winding up in effect are two types of organizations ultimately controlled by a few at the helm. I do vividly remember providing a national acupuncture organization back in 1998 with a a PR opportunity from a well known MD who wrote a blistering article regarding The " look " of acupuncture which has been extinguished when placed in the zoo of allopathic medicine. This spiritual MD (Dr. Judith Petry) through my efforts had given her permission for that national organiation to reprint her article. And the FEW who ran the helm of that organization decided not to publish...throwing away what many saw as a great Public Relations opportunity. That LARGE membership never got the chance to vote on that issue because the majority would have voted for the publication. And the reason it didn't get published? Maybe because it was a little to hard line but more importantly this misconception that large memberships run organizations is just not true. Here is that article that never got published in any US national acupuncture news media or organizational journal. http://www.sover.net/~jpetry/essay/MisTher.htm Richard In a message dated 4/13/2004 3:15:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, TashiDelay writes: Richard, From my point of view what is most troubling about your posts is stated in the line above: " A few key people " You are running an organization that accepts no input except for your vision (and those that support it). There is no communication base and no way for individuals to have their voices heard in your organization. You collect no dues, so you say you are doing this great work for all of 'our benefit' and representing everyone. BUT basically you are promoting yours (and a few key people's agenda). I have no complaint with this, but understand that when an organization truely represents it's members there are innumerable compromises and issues that must be factored into any and all actions and decisions. That type of filtering process definitely dilutes a hard edge, but is neccessary to bring large groups together. That said, I would appreciate that as you continue to do your fine work as you see fit, that you stop attempting to tear down other individuals or organizations for doing the work that they do. In the end everyone will benefit. robbee fian L.Ac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.