I did start this thread some time ago never dreaming that it would generate as much attention and the number of replies that it has. I appreciate and thank everybody who has posted a reply and hope to contact each, outside the forum, though that will take some time.
As Craig mentioned I have had some surgery and have been out of pocket for several weeks; but I'm finally beginning to get back.. In the meantime perhaps we ought to stop the thread, though I do want to say a few more words!
Mike Siemson certainly caught what I was trying to say (though I said it poorly): "The original statement was, "I think it would be helpful if we knew, at least: name, location, occupation,experience level." "The goal was, as I (Mike) see it, becoming a closer knit group." I've known Mike personally; through this forum; and through lots of e-mails out side the forum, for several years. I know what he does; I know where he is; I deeply respect his knowledge of our field; I admire his willing and helping hand which is evident to many of us and when Mike says something: I listen.
I absolutely agree with Ken Johnson when he so well states the reasons that bio info should not be mandatory. I've known Ken for a long time; I know where he lives; he has been in my home and shop; I know of his unwavering support for SAPFM; I know of his work; I know of his considerable knowledge of our field; and when Ken Johnson says something: I listen.
I know I started out saying that bio info should be required. I was wrong. I think I was trying to make us a "closer knit group". I was thinking of the non dues paying guy (and even the dues paying members) who sound off, giving no clue as to their experience or background. My inclination is to simply wonder; who's he? (or her, Pam!) Should we really get stirred up? Do they know what they're talking about?
I'm off my soap box now! which I suspect is good news to many.
John McAlister