And why or how is he being "quite" on it?
Jerry
Jerry
I'd bet a six-pack that AKC can & will answer all your questions if you ask them.Bob A. said:Conceptually this sounds good, but I do wish AKC would be more transparent regarding the approval process for formation of regional associations.
What exactly is the step by step process for formation of an association?
What exactly will be the basis for approving or denying those associations?
What regional boundaries make the most sense? How wide an area can an association cover?
For example, exactly what area comprises the range of the "South Central" Ret Assoc?
What are the bare minimum requirements for formation? What happens if there is misconduct by the organizers of an event held under the umbrella of an association?
How many associations are desirable? How many are too many?
Surely someone at AKC is thinking through the policy implications of this rather than taking a "ready - shoot - aim" approach.
Please understand that I think this can be a good thing....I just think that everyone should have the details.
Why was this kept under wraps?
I suppose the correct answer is "NONE OF YOUR &$%^ing Business WHY I posted. Except to get the opportunity to tell you, AGAIN, you screwed up!!!!!john fallon said:I brought it up as clarification of the n I was referring to when I mistakenly thought Mr B. was using a play on wordsJerry said:The "n" you made reference to is from your own post, which no one, that I can see, questioned. Why bring it up?
Jerry
A better question is, why you and kg felt compelled to comment at all since both Ed and Mr. B are more than able to take care of themself ?
john