If you look at committee members of the Institute in the past, there was only a few different presidents.
The pioneer president was a very nice old man. Always humble and friendly.
From my personal observation, At the beginning I believe he trusted the wisdom of the founder to run things as it is. However one fine day, the pioneer president spoke his mind in regards to the founder treating his students. The founder did not like it, that was the beginning of a tensed relationship between them.
The following annual general meeting, I believe things were staged. A new president was voted in, committee members were picks of the founder's choice. Why do i say that? First, the whole nomination and closing of nomination was too fast and smooth to be true. And then, when one of their member was "nominated" for a position, she then declined and said " I've told (name of person) that I don't want to be (name of position) ". Looks like some people were approached earlier before the AGM.
And guess what, the major and important positions were filled up by the founder's closest disciples , leaving few unimportant role to some uninspiring members who are usually quiet. Committee members of the past who were a little more verbal play no part in the new committee.
