Originally Posted by say that again

Onstep;

I agree with everything you stated. FWIW, the IPA's history has proven that blind faith tends to be a short term affliction. I don't think you'll find too many members that will disagree with your observations on the decision and methods used to organize the FQS. I've advocated keeping our powder dry until we have a clean head shot for a long time now, the "ready shoot, aim" logic of late only serves to weaken the association. Look at what happened over at the APA with Lloyd Hill and his gang. Unless we learn from history we're condemned to repeat it.

On the flip side,

Tough talk get's elected time and time again. In defense of our current administration, once the first IPA member was furloughed, the IPA had no choice but to seek an answer to the FQS issue. They really had no choice. They are seeking to change 20 plus years of history with limited resources do do so. While there may have been smarter choices, remember that hindsight is always 20/20 and it's easy for those of us without the burden of representing the membership to pass judgement.