Originally Posted by Zeonprime
IF an association WERE to be formed I beleive the players that support it would do their best to maintain the transparency and accountability because if they didnt then it would validate anyone who currently sees this as an "evil empire"
Without transparency or accountability, I firmly believe it would also fail because nobody would trust it or the process and would not ultimately support it. Guess thats the same thing.
Incidently Groom I wasn't insulted. You articulated a point very well that nobody has brought forth but that I am pretty sure is on everyone's minds, and thats my personal motives. Its a valid question and I have no problem discussing it.
Originally Posted by Groombug
Will this association come to dominate all Ontario (and/or Quebec) fields of play? As is the case out West, will we not be allowed to play without going through this association first, or have membership, get green light, whatever the procedure might be.
I think if the association is doing good things for players and airsoft, would it not be desirable for it to extend its influence to all fields in Ontario? I say influence because I see some fields as wanting to opt out, and some that want a partial relationship. Do I think an association should dictate where you play? No. But I think ultimately it is the membership that will decide those policies, not I. Right now this discussion is very speculative because we have not sat down to really discuss it in detail face-to-face.
Taking the OASA as an example, the slated purpose is to promote airsoft to field owners, offer a templated contract and management structure, negotiate a fee sharing agreement, and establish baseline rules (both safety and owner desired specifics to the venue). This enables the association to take a piece of land and turn it into an airsoft field using a 'template' - Plantation was done with a template. Theoretically you can take what I did there and apply it anywhere.
The end result is a field where the owner is being reasonably compensated and basic field infrastructure is paid for out of game fees - our half of the fee sharing. So far nobody (well, thats a lie, BB Bastard offset the cost on the tent) has had to pony up with financial donations or membership fees - you just come and play and by playing, you finance the field. If we could apply this model across the board, you could have an association with no dues thats based on participation at an OASA field, and membership is granted upon payment of your first game fees. The money we take in is directly proportional to the success of the field and as such, is put back into the field. Thats what I envision, at least simplistically. So far no host at Plantation is our of pocket for game expenses - they present their receipts for the items that were budgetted for for the game (planned ahead of time) and they are reembursed. Happy owner. Happy hosts. Happy players who know their fees are being used effectively at their venue of choice. Why not go to an association field when I know my money is being used that way?