Re: Oops, now caught up on the record fee drama

From: ray_harlan <rbharlan_at_comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:48:31 -0000

I think you may find that it is the NAA that is skinning the record
setters, not AMA. Time for your WAshington lobbiest to step in.

Ray

--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, "John Kagan"
<john_kagan_at_...> wrote:
>
> And I thought $10 for copying a sheet of paper was expensive (AMA's
new
> record 3-view policy).
>
> On one hand I can understand an organization trying to cover their
> costs and bring in some revenue.
>
> On the other hand, there are a bunch of people in our community who
> donate a lot of time and effort to make things happen and it's a
bit of
> a b-slap to get exorbitant charges from the "professionals".
>
> I suggest that we propose, through our SIG NFFS, that we do as much
of
> that work ourselves as possible to reduce or eliminate the
additional
> costs. I think that would be diplomatic way of saying "no" to
these
> new charges.
>
> I'm a big fan of "checks and balances", and it seems that we need a
> bunch of pushback here – through our official channel.
>
Received on Thu Jan 17 2008 - 09:48:35 CET