"My guess based on seeing the lists of new members which had been published in the magazine is that very few members requested confidentiality."

But isn't it the obligation of the National to protect the interests of those few who have requested confidentiality?

Since you've mentioned the list of new members that is published in the club magazine, I would be interested in knowing how you arrived at the conclusion, "that very few members requested confidentiality"?

I see lots of gaps between consecutive membership numbers that would suggest to me that those individuals HAVE requested that their names be witheld.

Who are the following members? (No, I really don't want to know, it's a rhetorical question....) but a significant number of holes appear in the list. Only Jim Steffner can answer the question for sure if these 13 assumed members have all requested not being published. There are 82 new members names listed and 13 numbers not assigned. If we are to conclude that the 13 missing numbers are indeed members who have made such a request, it would appear that close to 16% of the new members since the last magazine was issued don't want their names published. Apply that figure to the national base and we're talking a whole pile of people who Robert Eisenstadt would have no knowledge of belonging to the club.... much less which Chapter members had paid up their dues and belonged to the National.

R-4947
R-4949
R-4955
R-4958
R-4962
R-4980
R-4982
R-4987
R-4988
R-4989
R-4997
R-4998
R-4999