ECA do we want or need them

[ApOsTle51]

just personal interest really, I'll keep my personal opinions out of it but

The Electronic cigarette association. ECA - e-cigarette-forum.com • The place for electronic cigarette reviews, news and chat

Do you , as consumers feel you will benefit from it's actions ? do you feel as supplier founded and funded it has the consumers best interests at heart ??

Discuss..

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Unless I missed something--the ECA is getting out press releases and lobbing and their president is the chairman of njoy that jumped in and is spending money on the SE v. FDA case---so it begs the question--why the attack on this orginization and who else is doing anything but complaining? I do not see anybody else doing anything, so I must be missing the issue.----Sun

 

[ApOsTle51]

I'm not attacking in this thread Sun , just like to know what your average joe consumer thinks about it all

 

[Nuck]

I'm attacking. I think the ECA needs to be run by different people. The current incarnation is horrible.

 

[Kate]

My view is that a trade association could be a very good thing - to represent the interests of traders. I support trade unions and collective working practices though so not everyone will see the same benefits.

The history of the ECA here isn't great but they might be getting their act together a bit now, I'm not sure.

I have my fingers crossed that they can become internationally conscious, affordable, a unifying force and constructive. What's good for them is probably good for consumers (unless they prove to be corrupt and fix prices or something).

 

[VapeApe]

In my view, they would need to extend a hand to every ecig manufacturer and be all inclusive with sellers, representatives, etc. in order to have the credibility to have the impact they would like. On the other hand every group that helps the cause in any way is welcome in my book.

 

[JustJulie]

I personally think the ECA will do some good for the industry as a whole, and that will benefit consumers as well.

I think my main concern is the cost of becoming a member is so high that the little guy simply won't be able to afford a membership. I see that there is some wiggle room for smaller, more newly established business members to come aboard at perhaps a more affordable rate, but I'm not clear whether there is any real criteria for making those decisions.

I hate to see any business priced out of an ECA membership or have to come crawling with hat in hand for a reduced rate.

 

[Nicfits]

Well, If you want to look at track records, Take a look at the NRA.
They are probably the largest Association in the world. The have millions and millions of dollars, lobbyists, lawyers out the wazoo, Movie stars and celebrities representing them, and even some politicians.
And they battle with Washington all the time. And this for the most part is a battle over protecting our 2nd Amendment. And over the years, even with the huge backing the NRA has, our 2nd amendment rights are slowly being whittled away. Just one little law at a time, until one day, only criminals will have guns. But if it weren't for the NRA, I fear our 2nd amendment would have been trampled on a long time ago. If the 2nd amendment goes, the first will be next.

So yes Associations such as these can do good and help.
I fear though, in the end, the bucket is will not be big enough to bail out all the water, and the ship will eventually sink. What we need are more buckets.


Some historical quotes:


‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’ — Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
This is one of my favorites.

‘‘We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.’’ — Abraham Lincoln
And this one.
"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error.’’ — Justice Robert H. Jackson


uhoh!, here we go...


‘‘When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans ...... And so a lot of people say there's too much personal freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it. That's what we did in the announcement I made last weekend on the public housing projects, about how we're going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that to try to make people safer in their communities.’’— Bill Clinton, 3-22-94

The following comment does not reflect my views of those here on this forum.

All I have to say to all the sheeple out there.
Wake up people, wake up before it's too late.
Take a stand and fight for your rights, before you no longer have the right to fight.

 

[BBanshee]

I just think the ECA needs to do some sort of fund raising like other organizations. Maybe sell some merchandise to get some visual press. I would wear an ECA ball cap.

 

[Lika]

Hmmm.... Should I give my long winded opinion or the short summary? Does it really even matter?

 

[laynies]

Hmmm.... Should I give my long winded opinion or the short summary? Does it really even matter?

Go for it, long or short everyone's opinion matters.

Personally, I'm a little gunshy of the ECA and organizations in general. Regulation is all well and good but I sometimes think it can be taken too far. Like any kind of power, there's risk that corrupt people will use it to their advantage.

I do think it's a bit ironic that people are so keen on regulating what is in our e-liquid and coming off our atomizers, yet these same people are likely to go back to the evil analogs if our supply is cut. Will you fight then, to make cigarettes safer to smoke?

For the record, I do want a safe alternative. The fervor just makes me wonder is all.

 

[Kate]

I'd like to hear what you think Lika, please tell

 

[Vicks Vap-oh-Yeah]

The ECA is, like the ecig industry as a whole, in its infancy....do we expect a newborn to walk, use the toilet, dress and care for itself?

We're going to have growing pains, that's a certainty. But don't shoot the baby before its had a chance to mature.

They'll do good for this industry....it's just going to take time, bumps and bruises, and a certain amount of heartbreak.

 

[ApOsTle51]

c'mon Lika , spill the beanzz

 

[Babachoo]

I'll quote some of my other posts from the ECA forum here, as well as posts directed at the ECA that were in most cases never addressed and I too feel are very pertinent, especially since the posts that WERE addressed were addressed with scare tactics ("you may not able to purchase these from member vendors much longer if you do not support the call to arms that is needed to win this in public and governmental opinion" - exact quote posted by nycsublime girl) or avoided the issue at hand completely and addressed an entirely different issue that wasn't being challenged.

In response to the "Donate to the ECA" thread...

You're asking for donations? Register a proper non-profit and I'd happily donate. But an organization that will not make all of their accounting and minutes of meetings public, they're certainly not getting anything from me.

hmmm, why couldn't they get a non profit classification? Usually donations to non profits are tax deductible. Very interesting.

IMHO, we support the ECA by purchasing from it's member vendors.

This is suppliers' association. Why are you asking for donations? I don't 'donate' money to my local newsagent.

Is the ECA a trade organisation? Will people who make donations have a say in policy making?

Not in this lifetime.

- a direct reply to the call for donations.

ECA comes over as an American Front , so I'll pass for now. Good luck tho..

Right to Vape is a community run voluntary organisation.

I'd like to support ECA but they seem to have problems with defining themselves and how we fit in with their plans other than to provide money.

I believe you would conceive this org to be a (here it comes) LOBBY GROUP, you know, like AARP, due to it's designation code. In light of that I would hold off until I know the colors or their stripes, who's going to benefit, and the benefit they proport to make in the interest of the group. And just who is the "group". They will have expenses, no doubt!!

RtV (Right To Vape, another movement) is not very busy usually because not many people can be bothered to join and help organise it. Because it's a grass roots organisation and not led by a hierarchy or external leadership many people don't seem to know that it's up to them to make it work. This is what happens when we are told what to do all the time, we turn into helpless sheep.

Are people who donate going to get discounts from the businesses involved, in return for helping keep them in business? Or are they going to take donations but keep all the profits from a win?

How about a clear list of the ECA members, guidelines and requirements for joining? I think it'd also be prudent to list contact information for those in the ECA. Hell, we didn't even know Mr. Salmon was the President of the ECA until that video was posted!!

I think it's a little early to be asking for donations, usually an organization is a bit more organized and transparent before it does that. For one, what is the budget monthly? How much has been donated so far, and what is needed to reach the amount needed to cover the budget? What percentage of the money raised goes to what? If you don't know these things, then how do you know you even need donations? Vague statements and faceless entities along with poorly written forum posts, do not a trustworthy organization make.

I think a lot of us would like answers to these questions before we can consider donating.

I think this fledgling has some issues here to work on...

...things can get very murky very quickly without complete transparency, and that is what we need from ECA. We'll no doubt be hearing more from them.

I think most people at RtV would like to work with ECA, the better organised we are the more chance we have of achieving something constructive.

The important thing is to distinguish the difference between the two groups - ECA is a group of traders as far as I know and as such is a trade organisation, RtV is a group of consumers. No traders are allowed to manage at RtV because of the risk of conflicting interests although their input is welcomed in discussions.

I will not be giving money to a group of US Traders.
You do not represent me the British Customer.
It's your Business which you have appointed yourselves as unofficial Regulators.
Fund it from your profits.

I also wont be "donating" to any self appointed "ECA". Are you f'in kidding me? These people make money hand over fist on 10-20x markups of juice and hardware, then start their own organization and elicit donations on top of that?

For those who aren't quite clear on what a 501(c)(6) is...

It's basically a business league (like the NFL or your local chamber of commerce). 501(c)(6) organizations may engage in limited political activities that inform, educate, and promote their given interest. They may not engage in direct expenditures advocating a vote for a political candidate or cause. Donations to 501(c)(6) organizations are not required to be disclosed.

Please take a moment now and read this page, since I can't post links please follow these steps.
1. google "for-shelters/comparison-501c3-501c4-501c6.html"
2. click on the first result, from petfinder dot com but click the "Cached" version because the normal link displays a blank page for some reason, and view the table showing the differences between the classifications

That page has plenty of info to explain why I believe noone in their right mind should donate to this organization, and why I believe that they themselves weren't fully educated regarding the differences in 501 organizations, or just outright thought that we would be stupid enough to not notice the seemingly slight difference in classification, and just assume that donating money to a business league that has little to no accountability as per its classification status would be a great idea.

To the board of the ECA, I ask this...

What would be the point of us giving you donations if you can't even use it as expenditures to promote or discourage any specific legislation regarding your cause? And since you can't spend that money to campaign for any political reasons, what would you spend it on? Whatever it is that you say you'll spend it on, if it is indeed something we could all agree needs to be funded, and it doesn't violate any laws or regulations imposed on your organization...how would we really know what you're spending our money on if you have absolutely no obligation nor legal requirement to make public nor report to the IRS your donations and expenditures.

If you can't answer that question, which I suspect you can't, you are in way over your head and have already gotten off to a rotten start. Regardless of your initial intentions were, I'm afraid that what you applied for and accepted is far from something the general vaping public would support now. If your intentions weren't to fleece money from us, which 501c6 status would make VERY easy for you to do, then I truly feel bad that you jumped into something based on emotion and not logic, and didn't bother to educate yourself before acting.

I hate to have to be so blunt, but you see, I too like to educate the public, as I'm doing in this thread. But there's a difference between your business league and I. I don't ask for donations for my services and I don't put out faulty facts such as the first bit of information we saw you post about average vaping consumption habits.

One last comparison in case it still hasn't sunk in...

I enjoy watching football games and have a couple of favorite NFL teams.

Vapers enjoy vaping and have a couple of favorite suppliers.

The NFL is a business league (501c6) that is funded by licensing fees and dues.
The ECA is a business league that wants to be funded by your donations.

When I buy a jersey at Footlocker, the NFL makes its cut of the money.
When I buy a bottle of eliquid at Ruyan, the ECA makes nothing, and Ruyan would lose my business if they started charging more in order to give a percentage to the ECA, because the ECA can serve no purpose really other than to educate the public. But this forum educates the public much more than the ECA ever could. The ECA can't campaign for or against legislation, so why are they needed?

The NFL was founded in 1920 and doesn't spam for donations or beg people to put links in their sigs to get more suckers to go to their site and donate money.
The ECA was founded a couple of weeks ago and immediately jumped right to "GIVE US UR MONIES NAO!".

I won't even go into detail about how their posts here have numerous spelling and grammatical errors or how it takes days for them to answer questions, and completely avoid certain questions. I won't even bicker about how they named their organization using a word we all hate (cigarette). I'll just conclude by saying that if it looks like crap, sounds like crap, and smells like crap, it must be crap, which is unfortunate because when I first heard about the ECA and what they were planning to do, I was hoping that we would have someone who could fight for our cause, but that's not the case. If they actually ever intended to do such deeds, why on earth did they essentially make it impossible for them to do what they said they were planning to do (by filing as a business league)?

Thank you for your time, keep your donations in your wallets, you'll need it for other things soon enough.

Don't you guys think that the manufactures like ruyan, smoores etc...are the one's who are supposed to be lobbying the congress. it will be their biggest loss if they lost consumers from USA.

I was on ECA website for the last couple of days, and have registered previously. But everywhere you try to look there's a DONATE link. All I would like to see is sort of a schedule of events, meetings posted and with whom, etc. Or are they waiting for money before doing anything.

You know, if the ECA people could actually come into this thread and address some of the questions that Kate and I have raised, I would actually consider volunteering my time and brainstorming to the effort if I could just see SOME signs of organization and direction.

Money could buy thinktanks. But you could get the same thing from an educated volunteer group if you could just get your stuff together and answer our questions. If you can't answer tough questions from people who are actually FOR your cause, how do you expect to face down OPPONENTS whom will probably have much tougher questions than people like myself and Kate? Please marinate on that for a little bit. Hopefully you'll turn things around before a lot of us lose interest and permanently stamp a seal of disapproval on your organization. Be thorough and answer all of our questions and you may get something worth much more than a cash donation.

I have made no statements whatsoever saying that the ECA is not a 501c6. Search for my posts in the ECA forum and you'll see the issues I, Kate, and many others have brought up that should be adressed directly, not by spinning things around and addressing issues that we aren't even talking about, like you just did here.

But I said "formerly" because once I saw the membership application thread, I realize that this is just a scam and you'll never be able to earn my respect, as I said in that thread. So keep doing what you're doing and don't mind me, but don't be upset if those of us who aren't paying $4100 a year MINIMUM to join your rediculous middleman skimming operation to wave the banners and bang the drum of optimism and blindly support the ECA here on the forum. I bet that all of these "nothing to see here folks, go back to your homes" people who are responding to posts that question the ECA's organization, modus operandi, and communications skills (or lack thereof), I bet that most all of them have a vested interest in the ECA, if not actually being members. So rather than admit that they've decided to back an organization that would have a hard time getting a "C" on a 2nd grade writing assignment, they continue to show their sheep-like blind faith in what they feel is the "only hope" for ecigs. Our only true hope is that people wake up and realize that the way the ECA is currently operating is not in our best interests, as the typical consumer and even small business owner.

I sincerely hope that people read the ECA's words to see what I know in my heart but am not so good at expressing here, that the ECA is a ship that was released from the dry dock and pushed out to sea with a motor that burns hope, but the captain appears to be drunk and there's a massive hole in the stern. It's doomed, but it's not too late to jump ship and swim to shore and built a new boat with new captains. Read their words (ECA), not mine, and you'll most likely come to the same conclusion if you use your intelligence and not your emotions to discern fact from fantasy.

I'm sorry to have to be a negative Nancy, but with the amount of money you're trying to gouge people for, I feel I need to speak out to avert people from losing their hard earned money. That is all, thank you for your time.

Replies to the Eca Application thread which is a good for a laugh or a heart attack, depending on your current state of health and mind...

LMAO @ $300/month basic membership

ROFL@ $500 just to apply

Forget everything I said in the other thread about possibly giving your organization a chance to earn my respect by addressing the questions you've ignored from myself and other users. This thread is the final nail in the coffin and you will will NEVER be able to earn my respect after revealing this BS money grabbing scam.

LOLLERSKATES @ all the typos in your "contract" what a scam

Does it really say "We herby..."

Why on earth would anyone give 500 + 300/month to an organization that can't even do basic proofreading let alone spell 6 letter words. The ECA is run by clown shoes. It's downright embarrassing.

Yeah but we'll all go to hell if we don't give them money

- a great comment regarding the scaremongering done by the ECA anytime they have been challenged.

oh dear !! $500 and then $300 pm nice little earner that one . I'm sorry but I still disagree with un-elected affiliates speaking on behalf of the Industry, quite laughable really.

where's the UK border force..the ECA is one import I don't want ...

I won't go to hell. I will cease to exist as a separate entity and my life's energy will reunite with the collective... and maybe a bit of me will become part of a honeybee... but i won't know it!

I "herby" decree it's so!

another great reply to the above quote, and hilariously pointing out the repeated engrish word used over and over in the ECA's application contract, "herby" instead of "hereby"

You know..the ECA has bothered me from the inception. They discussed enforcing limiting juice to 24mg at the first meeting but refused to disclose it publically. Then they posted that "I'm super serious!!" thread following with a disclosure thread that disclosed nothing but how inept they are with the English language.

Now they are asking for over 4000 the first year from forum suppliers in order that suppliers can be forced to follow their rules that can change on a whim by an unelected board not to mention the other recent post asking for money from trusting consumers.

I have little hope these people are competent enough to enact change but I do think they are incompetent enough to do damage. It disturbs me even more than this highly influential forum was so quick to lend support to the ECA without proper vetting.

I'm hoping the many small businesses we all know and love are smart enough not to fall for this money grab until the ECA is run by people that graduated high school.

From the "ECA Misinformation" thread...

Come on ECA, truth and transparency please. Some of us want to support you but can't because you're putting the cart before the horse.

ECA is still making this statement:
Quote:
Myth: People consume too much nicotine with electronic cigarettes because there is no governor.
Fact: The amount of nicotine in electronic cigarettes is much less than other OTC products.

Tobacco cigarettes and smoking cessation products, like electronic cigarettes and many other non-smoking-related products, rely on consumers to regulate their consumption and use according to manufacturer labeling. No one can control the misuse of products when directions are not followed.

That said, the intake of nicotine from electronic cigarettes appears to be substantially less than acceptable standards already in the marketplace. For instance, the consumption of a tobacco cigarette delivers about 1-1.5 mg of nicotine; with the average US smoker consuming 13.9 cigarettes per day, they consume 14-21 mg of nicotine per day. Depending on the smoking cessation product, labeling suggests consumption of 6-48 mg of nicotine per day.

By comparison, an electronic cigarette cartridge, depending on manufacturer and cartridge style, produces 0-16 mgs of nicotine when fully consumed by approximately 300 puffs. A recent industry study indicates the average electronic cigarette user takes 62.8 puffs per day. This suggests the average electronic cigarette smoker is consuming 3.36 mg of nicotine per day, far less than that typically consumed when using tobacco cigarettes or smoking cessation products.
It just looks like deliberate misinformation to me now. How are we supposed to support an organisation that appears to lie so easily?

Come on ECA!

It is about time that someone from ECA to give us an answer about this. Or at least accept that you made a mistake and correct it.

I get the feeling that this is more to do with politics than trying to be helpful for vapers.

The ECA appear to have appointed themselves as our political representatives and seem to want to address every potentially negative argument that might be directed at us - in this case "People consume too much nicotine with electronic cigarettes because there is no governor."

The fact is that we have no reliable measurements to counter that view so something seems to have been conveniently invented.

Is this just a case of political spin?

That query was initially acknowledged by Lacey on the 5th May and the ECA website still has what I think is misleading information. I don't like to see you make statements that will bring your honesty into question and I can't see how those figures can be related to real life experience.

Check the figures yourself, what you are claiming is fantasy.

EDIT

I did see your acknowledgement Lacey and that was a couple of days ago. The original post was written on another thread and you acknowledged it on 5th May.

Even if you find the study that shows we only take sixty odd draws a day I can't see how you can tie this into real life experience.

16mg is not the upper limit and a cartridge is not a standard size.

Prove to me that this is misinformation and please provide a link to a scientific study and not to the forum.

- response to Kate's above post.

You're the ones making the claims, I have good reason to doubt you. Protocol is that the person making claims is obliged to provide proof.

- answering Lacey's reply

And as I noted, I am working on getting you the link to the study. I agree with you that anything the ECA says should have backup and I am sure that it does and if it doesn't, I too would like the claim taken down.

However, if you are looking for someone who should be proving their claims, might I direct your energy to ASH who is making the claim that "If you don’t want people sitting next to you – in a waiting room, restaurant, bar, or any other area where smoking is now prohibited – using one of these devices to get around smoking bans, and forcing you and your loved ones to inhale deadly nicotine – please help now!"

- reply to above post

If you're saying that you are in the same league as ASH US then that really knocks your credibility to zero, they are known liars. Out of context, out of perspective and spinning uncontrollably.

I'm not interested in them, that's like dealing with trolls. If you've set yourself up in opposition comparable to that then you really have problems.

- reply to above post

That kind of rhetoric does not wash, especially with us Englanders. It's like telling us to check that the opposition's weapons are battle ready instead of us checking that our own are. Professionals get it right first time, certainly before going public with claims that they are not certain about. It makes the association look like a medicine show rather than the public face of e-cigarettes.
Alan.

I asked a simple question fifteen days ago and I know I'm not the only one concerned about not having any answer about what you are saying on our behalf.

See this as troublemaking if you like but I see the ECA as totally unreasonable for letting this go on for so long. I may inconvenience you but if it encourages honesty and transparency then you can call me whatever you like.

Don't tell me what to spend my time and energy on either, I bet I could put you to shame if we added up karma.

EDIT

Apologies, it wasn't fifteen days ago that I asked about this, it was on the fifth - twelve days ago.

I think the ECA should hire Kate to compile and organise their information...She seems to be one of the most skilled investigators on this site..I have seen her gather links and other informative info in what seems like seconds, and manage to post a picture of a cat to embelish it...This kind of scrutiny is better questioned here, by Kate, then in court or Washington, where they are not going to accept," Uhh let me check "...
I have to honestly say that when I went to the ECA site to make a donation, I decided not to, because it looked like a bunch of suppliers trying to bail out a sinking row boat...I dont want to insult anyone here or pass judgement as Lacy seems very trustworthy as well as other people posting...But I have witnessed Kates integrity and straightforward nature and I think that demands our respect and trust that her motives are PURE

I just went through the thread, and I don't see Kate attacking anyone here. I am one of the "accidental quitters" who is extremely worried about having access to vaping in the future. I don't understand how someone might ignore the fact that using information that is even potentially wrong can be very dangerous for our case. While I can only speak for my peer group and the subjective feeling I got from the forum, 60 odd puffs per day seems like very, very, very far from truth. Now it could as well be that all of us are "extreme vapers" and there is a study that puts us right there, but then we definitely need that study ASAP, and I would strongly suggest removing that information until such study is widely available.

I'm fully with Kate on this one. I think the association representing the interests of those who vape and those who supply stuff for those who vape should be scrupulously accurate in their facts.

Lamar

Kate is very passionate she always has been. I read her posts when I was just starting out as well she is a wealth of knowledge

You've made public statements and are presenting yourselves as representatives of the vaping community, now you're basically saying the rest of us can shut up if we don't like what you're saying for us. That makes me uncomfortable and I'd rather that you didn't say anything than to set us up to look like manipulative, delusional idiots.

EDIT to add:

Lacey, if you really want to represent us and think forum polls have any validity then ignoring the results of these two doesn't add up:

two links were here but I can't post or quote links but the thread titles were

"How much eliquid do you use?"
and
"Draws/puffs per ml"

If you are going to make claims then YOU are liable for their accuracy.

You are basically dishonest Lacey and want to deflect the fact that you have no way to justify those figures and claims - note the ones highlighted.

If you can't prove your claims then you shouldn't be making them, it's simple and nobody elses responsibility.

It seems to me that this discussion is not working on our common and best interest. E-Cig.

ECA is using the report of a study that was made by Janty and it seems that ECA does not have the total report or can not show it as a request from Janty. So, we do not know the method used for the study and that give us a lot of questions against it results. We are not going to digest those findings until we know who the study was conducted!

Now, ECA funders are mostly USA suppliers and I will assume that they can add more than 3000 regular clients. So they can organize a proper poll/study with their clients. Why you ECA do not organize an Internet poll/study with your clients data base and find out all this questions?

We are supporting ECA (at least in my case) and I think we do deserve some respect if we do not agree with "facts" that ECA is making public.

Do your own research or be able to show the study you are using for those facts, so nobody can say that you are manipulating information.

Just my idea

Facts can be as bad as lies when they are presented in the wrong way....I think Kate is absolutely brilliant in spotting any flaws with the way facts are presented and should always be listened to.

More deception Lacey.

You haven't answered any of those points.

So is your statement true and accurate?

Just look at how difficult it is to debate that issue with Kate, who's pretty much on your side here, now imagine zealots like ASH.

disagree. You need to use a realistic figure.

At present it would be so easy to show that the 300 figure is false and discredit the whole argument for vaping on the basis that you are distorting the truth and deliberately misleading.

That thread ended with Lacey privately admitting defeat and finally removing the rediculous "62 puffs per day= average ecig use" claim from their website after nearly a week of arguing back and forth in a very unprofessional way and personally attacking a few members, mainly Kate. Lacey then closed the thread, hoping to stop the bleeding and prevent even more people from noticing just how poorly she represents the ECA and esmokers in general.


From the "ECA tax filing non for profit" thread...

So is this a trade organisation that wants to recruit non trade members? Will non traders have voting rights?

Thanks for the info.

Does that mean that there are guidelines for how the organisation is structured, who can be members and how directors etc are elected?

What I don't really understand is that you charge membership fees and are made up of vested interests but you say you're a charity. That would be illegal in the UK and you wouldn't be able to claim non profit status.

In the UK a non profit organisation is made up of it's members who elect a management committee when necessary. In turn the management committee employs staff to take on the day to day running of things, again if necessary. You have gathered a group of vested interests, made a management group and are now seeking a membership and donations from people who have been ineligible to join in decision making or vote.

I'm just a bit confused at how you can be a non profit really, you sound more like a club or trade body.

Anyway, good luck with it.

The first thing they need to do, if they are to be taken at all seriously, is to appoint a copy writer and a proof reader, preferably with basic skills in spelling, grammar and construction that might avoid crucifying the English language in the manner displayed by the faceless, nameless entity that seems to be the 'spokesthing' for the ECA. Eighteen mistakes in one post is not impressive. Try appointing a person with a name who can speak on behalf of the ECA and who can be contacted. Despite the high aspirations of this organisation, there is a distinct lack of professionalism in their presentation. I'm not dumbing down the concept of the ECA, that's another issue, but I have to question their ability to represent the people they are proposing to recruit as members.
Alan.

- after quoting a post from the ECA containing TONS of errors.


So there you have it, 5,328 words and an hour and a half of my time when I should be sleeping (I work graveyard) just to show you all how I and others feel about the ECA. I feel that strongly about showing you all what a joke they are that I'm sacrificing sleep in the hopes that one less sucker will fall for their money-grabbing scam. Have a great day and thanks for your patience in reading this all, once you piece everything together logically, your wallet will thank you.

 

[BiteMe]

Um.... Thanks?

At the vey least, I now have more reference material than I know what to do with!
Seriously though, Thank you for giving me the tools to form an opinion.

 

[OutWest]

@Babachoo - I think the fact that you have 1 post saying how you need a car charger, and all of your other posts are slamming the ECA, one of the few groups actually doing anything to try to keep ecigs legal in the U.S., speaks louder than anything.

 

[yvilla]

Babachoo, I have refrained from replying to any of your attack posts up to now, but no longer can I do so.

I am a mere consumer of ecigs and supplies, so have no vested interest in the ECA whatsoever, other than what it can potentially do for all ecig consumers as a whole.

It seems to me that you have no agenda here whatsoever, but to attack the ECA.

Most of the rest of us have a different agenda, and that is promoting the continued, lawful and easy availabilty of ecigs in our respective countries.

I wish you would just go away.

 

[Lika]

First things first, I don’t see this thread as an attack on the ECA at all. These questions need to be brought up in a diplomatic way and this thread does just that.

I support what the ECA is trying to accomplish but I did not support its sloppy, rambunctious and somewhat arrogant beginnings. The good news is that has been on the mend in recent weeks as it becomes more organized while extending its reach into the political and regulatory spectrum.

Right now the one major caveat I have with the ECA is that it is a trade association but also takes on the appearance of a consumer advocacy. For the simple fact the ECA was founded by and obtains its major funding from suppliers it will and must look out for the trader first and foremost. My point is that it shouldn’t come off as something it’s not just because it needs consumer support to further its cause. Implications of different and conflicting interests will by nature always have negative connotations.

On the contrary, one could contradict what I am saying by proclaiming traders wouldn’t exist without consumers. I realize the direct link between trader and consumer (one buys and one sells). It’s the rule of supply, demand and commerce. More importantly there is currently a unique but common bond and that is the government’s threat to e-Cigs in general.

The bottom line for a trader is being able to do business. That must be established and secure before the consumer ever enters the equation. This is especially true if the consumer base already exists and we all know there are plenty in this industry. As a rule a business must look out for its own interest above all else. The same is true for a consumer. Both should expect quality, safety and fair interaction. The real difference is one is out to make money and the other is out to save money – its called survival.

The ECA is seeking established business owners as its majority member base which clearly solidifies itself as a trade association. Yet it also accepts membership applications from e-Cig activist groups. It is common knowledge that activist groups are usually made up of individuals. In this case those activists are consumers. It also accepts general donations from consumers. Can we really have both so deeply rooted in a very public ECA especially where the nature of the organization inherently favors one over the other?

That brings me to this specific question… Is it a conflict of interest to have a trade organization and a consumer advocacy under one controlling entity? I’ll take that question a step further and suggest this forum as an example. Ever wonder why all the fights break out here between supplier and consumer? It’s not because we’re all a bunch of grumpy ex-smokers, whiny consumers or bullish suppliers. It is because this forum, by nature of member class, acts as a trade association and a consumer advocacy under the same collective community - think about it. Of course that was not the original intention of this community but it has grown to manifest itself as such. Mucho kudos to SJ for handling it all as well as he does.

The basis of my principle argument is the ECA, being founded by traders, accepts consumer donations and tries to take a clear role in consumer advocacy when in reality it is a trade association that intends to lobby government and look out for its own interests. The ECA is building a glass bridge over a fence that has always set defined boundaries for sellers and consumers. Will it work? Time will only tell but my instinct says it won’t.

Again, using this forum as an example; we’re already seeing suppliers bail and others contemplating the idea. IMO, if the ECA is to survive it will ultimately become one or the other - much like this forum. Here the suppliers are out numbered by simple mass giving the consumer the upper hand. With the ECA the suppliers have full control through their own requirement of substantial self funding. The ECA advocates the goal to ultimately remove suppliers from the board of directors. It is common practice to consider membership dues as an investment towards the future of business and trade. Point being, they will always have control whether they remove themselves from the board or not. The ECA will grow to be a full fledged political lobbying group for business, not consumer.

Right now the ECA is kind of like having big biz lobbyist, politicians and voters all in the same house. Makes me think of Italian salad dressing; give it a good shake and it tastes good but let it sit for a while and all the ingredients separate – taste it then. Not so good.

That said, the closest option on the poll for me was the last choice. Also I am not attacking the ECA because I do think their intentions are good. I am only pointing out the discrepancies as I see them. I see nothing wrong with a true-to-form trade association. They’re good and in some cases very much needed to protect and sustain an industry. But the consumer side should be separate. The good news is that I am open to other interpretations. So if a die-hard ECA fan wants to give it a try. Go for it. Just realize that I also realize there is a movement within our industry. I also realize there are other movements that utilize all facets of a movement to achieve a common goal. The difference is the most successful ones separate themselves in a clearly defined fashion – usually by supporting each other as separate entities.

I admit I do have some doubts in what I've said and there are some flaws in my opinions. But those are solely based on the reasoning that I may be looking too far into the future of the ECA and need to focus more on the here and now. Nothing that I’ve said here will matter if there is no legal electronic cigarette commerce. My thoughts of the “here and now” tell me we need to do whatever it takes to protect all of us, consumer and supplier alike. If the ECA is our best bet for that then so be it. It’s just that acting hastily and working out the details later often results in shooting one’s own foot. On the other hand it could also result in a missed opportunity. In this case being our common goal of ensuring the commerce and legality of the electronic cigarette.

 

[yvilla]

Just to be clear, Lika, I have not said or claimed this thread was an attack on the ECA.

Constructive criticism is one thing. Challenging the ECA to represent supplier interests and our consumer interests in the best possible manner is one thing.

But Babachoo has done nothing here on this forum but attack the ECA, and in my opinion, in a completely over-the-top, strident and unjustified fashion (with the sole exception of that one post about a car charger, as Outwest noted).

Why would that be?