As reported in the newly released March/April 2016 APA Magazine, current APA president and longtime polygraph establishment politico Walt Goodson's suggestion to effectively disenfranchise the vast majority of APA members has been soundly rebuked.

Of his slap down, Goodson admits:

"As I mentioned in my last [column's] message, the current election process has been called into question by a few of our members due to its limited capacity to offer candidates an opportunity to share their platforms beyond a 500-word candidate statement and a photo. ... After the publication of that message, I received considerable support for the current electronic election process. Moreover, informal discussions with APA board members during the Winter Board Meeting revealed unanimous backing for the current process. It is very clear to me that access to the polls is most important to us."

Elections are fast approaching. Let the games begin.

Ark, the requirements are minimal: one must be a full member of the APA.

The more candidates for president-elect there are, the greater my chances of winning.

In my opinion, the good ol' boys want a two-man race.

That said, I would not be surprised if certain nominees for APA president-elect were "discouraged" from running by establishment politicos. 

Injecting a slate of straw candidates into the mix would be an interesting experiment.

Dunno. Let's look into it. The by-laws are readily available on www.polygraph.org, the same folk who claimed 98.6% accuracy for fifteen (15) years -- ten (10) of them after the devastating NAS wake-up call. 

As for a university degree, I'm not sure. At the last APA national seminar, the cool kids in charge foisted an ObamaCare-like massive redo of much of the terms, conditions and language of the association's constitution. So, nothing would surprise me.

But let's move on. 

Maybe one (or more) of your APA-member harem could run for president-elect. I'd love to see a wide field of races, religions and genders throw their hats in the ring for all offices. 

The APA political machine has been whitebread WASP for far too long.

I wonder if such sentiments could be swayed by a financial incentive...

Maybe someone will nominate him for president elect.

Ark, I'm having second thoughts on running.   

I fear that my platform of a test-taker bill of rights, realistic research vis-a-vis a countermeasure challenge series, and equal opportunity for APA members is simply a bridge too far.

Last year, when the politicos who run the APA decided to shitcan the organization's time-honored goal "to serve the cause of truth with integrity, objectivity and fairness to all persons," they really tipped their hand.

In my opinion, the "new, improved" APA is no longer primarily about truth, as it was in the days of Backster. Now, the APA seems to be dedicated mainly to sustaining the polygraph indu$try. 

Truth -- especially the truth about the "test" -- be damned.

I have come to accept the fact that in life, sometimes (perhaps all too often) the bastards win.

What got you so discouraged Dan? You normally have much more fire in the belly than this. Very recent events have shown that a brash, persistent and determined outsider can unexpectedly topple the ivory towers if he gets the message out.

Most industry organizations are profit focused; hard not to be in a capitalist infrastructure. Pure altruism is usually not very cost effective, otherwise we'd have fresh baked bread every morning. But, ethics plays in the hearts of most non-sociopaths. Perhaps another more tactful approach may open doors?