But why ruin the surprise? Think of the excitement as the curtain drops, under a hypothetical certification. You get to find out who you're married to, and what system you're going to work under. And if you have a problem with the way things are unfolding, no problem at all: all you need to do is get 250 guys in your "block" (guys from all over the country, that you haven't necessarily even met, or learned to work with), and, as long as the people you're petitioning decide your petition matches the "association's objectives (no definition), then you'll be able to redress the situation. A little awkward if you're disagreeing with them on substantive issues, isn't it?

My contention remains that whoever ends up running DPA, is going to be picked from a bench we're all familiar with. The team jerseys might look a little different, but you'll recognize the numbers. What the last few pages of this thread reveal is that now they'll have a structure where they're completely insulated from the democratic process, and starting with a nice raise.

It's a power struggle, pure and simple.

The antics, gyrations, and constitutional twerking we've seen would be hilarious, except for two things: 1) we're talking about our careers, and 2) we're wasting precious activism on a very questionable dead-end.

Someone earlier posted Fielding's e-mail, which lets the DPA get a little distance from the previous writer's... excentric missives. It's very well written, as always. Often disingenuous, but certainly well-written. He spoke about apathy being a problem. I totally agree with him. It's unfortunate the DPA is hijacking an unknown (and unverified) number of activist members, for the benefit of whoever the "core of insiders" is.