I think it would be more meaningful for the NSMBA to have an ambassador to deal with these sorts of conversations than for them to preach to the converted at their AGM. I think its a credit to NSMB.com that the website is the go-to place for these issues.
The trails are not for the exclusive use of NSMBA members, someone who does not participate under the NSMBA umbrella is still a stakeholder.
I don't disagree that it would be good if the NSMBA could communicate on this forum constantly but I'll tell you that when I was on the Board (key word "was" - I'm just a plain old member these days), we debated the effort/reward ratio of doing so. And back then, we came to the conclusion that it was too much work for too little reward. Maybe that's changed but I don't think so. For one, NSMB.com is a bit of an echo chamber as most will attest. The same stuff comes up again and again. And for the most part, the NSMB.com community does a good job of saying what the NSMBA position is (even if it's not in the most diplomatic terms). Second, anonymity is a problem. People say shit on here that they would never say to you in person. And so trying to reason with that person generally isn't effective. They put their talking points on repeat and in the end the only thing the person trying to reason has done is waste time they could have put into something useful. Third, as hard as it may be to believe, the NSMB.com community is not a representative sample of the riding community. I think that there are some folks passionate about mountain biking on here, but there are plenty of passionate and skillful people outside of this community as well. Spending all your time responding to NSMB.com threads simply doesn't get much done.
Personally, I got my back up because the OP was being incendiary with that poll with its two silly options. Especially in the context of Bridle Path and Cardiac Bypass (which I consider part of the primary Bridle Path route) where I believe they should be at the easier end of the spectrum. I agree that there ARE legitimate questions to be made about the preservation of tech or whether trails should form spaghetti or whether there should be directional signage in the forest. And NSMB.com isn't a bad place to discuss them - I just don't think there should be an expectation for the NSMBA to weigh in on every thread.
As for the AGM as preaching to the converted - you haven't been around long enough or been to enough AGMs! The year I signed up for the Board, the NSMBA was probably at its lowest point ever. It was depressing. Almost no one was happy about anything. Next AGM ridership morale was somewhat higher but meeting was still a massive bitchfest about how we sucked (I'm paraphrasing here). And then more progress was shown, TAP launched, the web site got fixed, finances were put in order, relationships with land managers were healed, events were run, volunteers were mobilized, newsletters were sent, tweets were twittered, and more. So maybe the latest AGM looks like it was preaching to the converted. Or maybe it's because a whole lot of people in the riding community put in a bunch of work to make it the way they wanted.
It sure isn't perfect. There is still a ton of work to do. And I'm happy that there's a new board and a great community to lead and do it!
Tim