<html> <body> Amen David, I might add that if licensing is given over to the states that it will have a chilling effect on the Guild.  It will also start a separate and practically independent system where people may be licensed but not guild members or guild members and licensed.  Which will be more important? Why state licensing of-course! If the Philadelphia Chapter continues hurtling down that road it may eventually succeed in marginalizing itself.  After all, who needs Guild association if they can just get a government license.  Don't kid yourselves, the government license will be even more ridiculously easy to obtain.  It will only take a few trips to court to ensure that.  The Guild does not have sufficient resources to control the political process that will develop around licensing like a medical association can.  This means that the license will eventually degenerate into a revenue item in the eyes of a state.  A state license will naturally carry more influence than a Guild designation with the general public and the last nail will be driven home to the proverbial coffin.  The resort to force of law to achieve an organization's goals is always a sign of fatal weakness (growing irrelevance) within that organization.  The push to make the organization irrelevant is sadly amusing.  Sad because it is not necessary and there is plenty of strength within the Guild as it is now constituted. I was brought into the Guild by my late mentor Guy Nichols.  I've been intending to pass the testing regime simply to put arrogant naysayers in their place.  Problem is, it is hard to arrange for testing regionally and my store has kept me locked-down here in south Texas.  I enjoy the camaraderie of like minded individuals I encounter in the guild and the push to attack that is one I hope faces resounding defeat.  We don't build the guild up by cutting people off.  It really is that simple. Bemused in Texas, Andrew Anderson  (no relation of David's)   At 12:43 PM 6/13/2007, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On Jun 13, 2007, at 7:53 AM, Ron Berry wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""> I received an updated Bylaws report which I have posted on the web. There is a directory of late and updated submissions at <a href="http://www.ptg.org/members/docs/2007/Council/"> http://www.ptg.org/members/docs/2007/Council/</a> ron</blockquote> As an apparently endangered and, in some quarters, reviled "associate," I'm not sure if I can post to, or go on, PTG-L. Let's see: 4,300 members of PTG; less than 400 at the National Convention; to me, if I was active and "owned-in" to  an organization's well-being, those numbers suck. And reveal some deep disconnect between leadership and membership. And now a portion of our membership is actively pursuing more judgement, more exclusion. Makes me feel respected and appreciated. (Irony alert.) The RPT test standards, IMO, are ridiculously low. I have followed RPTs and their work for 25 years. The good ones are awesome, and deeply inspirational to me---but that's several.  The others---the majority---are just tune & run guys, with no real interest in piano service. Inspiration feels vastly different than exclusion and judgement. This is offered with humility; I am one of a big (relative to our discussion---in the hundreds) number of gifted and hard-working men and women who work on some of the greatest pianos in the world on a daily basis, for some of the greatest artists that ever lived---and have made a decision, for whatever considered and no doubt intentional reason, to either not use or not pursue the RPT designation. If I was leading a non-profit service organization based on a highly personalized, difficult, and prized skillset---maintaining great pianos at their highest level---I would literally fall over myself extending hands to those of our profession who have risen to the top of their game, whether members or not. I would welcome and treasure their real-world, hard-won input. I would ask them, in an atmosphere of collegiality, equality, and respect, why they have chosen not to support our fantastic PTG and its best-in-the-world continuing education programs. I would ask them what we can do as a Guild to feel like and be an organization that attracts more than 6 or 7% of its total membership to its national conference. This is written and sent with respect and gratitude that PTG exists and that it provides me with an excellent teaching platform, among many other tangible and ethereal benefits; we have a sacred obligation to pass on our hard-won skills to the next generation. I write this because I love our work and our Guild, and as a positive force, willing to work towards understanding and unafraid of genuine, authentic, and respectful communication, confrontation, and resolution---another " highly personalized, difficult, and prized skillset...." My best to you----and see some of you in Kansas City. Please feel free to buttonhole me about this subject. David Andersen Malibu, CA</blockquote></body> </html>