Joemanji wrote:Perhaps these few loud voices raging against the NAF do not speak for as many people as they think they do?

Yes, I nominated (and voted for) Mike because I thought he'd do a great job running the NAF as it faces up to losing what I suspect will be something like half of its membership over the next year or two. I'm sure Beppe will too. But we're looking at an organisation that's made up of an absolute maximum of around 20% of global tabletop players as members, and only 15% of them are energised enough to vote. That effectively means means that the active membership of the NAF makes up only 3% of the total community.
I'm a member of the NAF, and would like its active membership to be more than 3% of tabletop members in the future. As it stands, as many, many others have pointed out, the figure stands to fall further in the wake of losing the dice. No-one here is raging at the NAF - everyone who contributes criticism has the interests of the NAF at hear and wants to see the NAF do well, otherwise why would they bother?