Originally Posted By: jbushart
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
As you know, I have a tendency to shy away from controversy. This position, however, has had the most mixed reaction than any comment I have made, to date. It really surprises me.
Most of those contacting me support the concept that we, as members, should not provide any financial support to a vendor who acts (or support those who act) to harm NACHI members. To the majority, it is really a "no-brainer".
On the other hand, I have one member who has filed an ethics charge against me for saying bad things about Mike Rowan claiming that it harms the membership. I won't name him (I understand that extremely short people who relocate from New Jersey to Florida disdain such attention), but he claims to represent many others.
I have a former NACHI president who questions that such a position is not a "professinal representation of the organization".
Some have actually suggested that I owe Mike Rowan an apology for requiring that he go on the record regarding his support, or lack thereof, for people who are committed to "rid Florida of NACHI".
This has been interesting.
Home Inspection Services of Missouri
"We're NACHI. Get over it."