The point of the original thread, before it got moved here, seemed to be judging the fitness of a candidate for the national BoD for the job based on his not answering questions posed in a sub-forum set up on this site to host the candidates' campaign statements. My point was the candidates did not set up these forums and may not know they exist; or that they have any activity, much less questions being asked and moderators making value judgements about how quickly the questions are responded to. FWIW, the candidate so-maligned actually set up a web page to communicate events between his regional chapters and had previously posted a candidacy statement on his own site. In this election the BoD decided not to allow links to such private sites and instead made the sub-forums we've have here now. This really isn't about board-members participating on this web site--although that would be great! It was originally about a moderator condemning a candidate for not participating in a thread he didn't even know existed. Funny, isn't it?