A VERY small number of people on this site have said 100% negative things about PF. A slightly larger number think PF "walks on water" and can do no wrong. A majority of Ultimatepheasanthunting.com forum members support the mission and idea behind PF*, wish it success, but at the same time some have called out issues with the organization. Are we allowed to recount stories where a chapters land acquisition idea was turned down by the regional rep because it was "small potatoes" (50acres) and wouldn't cover corporate overhead? Can we bring up instances of sales ideas to raise money for wildlife habitat were turned down because the money was raised by Pro Pheasants and not Pheasants Forever? A board provides oversight of a business, members of a nonprofit have a a right to oversight over everything(in my opinion). Can't we still support an organization and its core mission while calling to light things it does that we disagree with? Don't be thin skinned, learn to take constructive criticism. We can support an organization and at the same time discuss its flaws in order to make it better and keep it honest.
I do think more forum members might see things your way BB, if they weren't....lacking the polish of urban society: unsophisticated...ah yes, provincial, that's the word I'm looking for. But I don't want to paint them with a broad brush....
*my personal opinion