"I truly appreciate finding and reading this post and the comments. I feel saddened, but supported by the observations re District overload, not being consulted, top-down administration, in-group appointment, appointment of MD leaders at all costs, and other counter-intuitive (not to mention counter-Buddhist) SGI organizational policy. I practiced with the SGI for 30 years–through famine-feast, drought-flood, plague-wellness, disaster and more. Until the last cycle of leadership rearrangement. It seems to me that SGI continually puts the emphasis on the wrong sy-la’-ble. CEC wonders why we can’t keep members, without asking fundamental questions. Why do people leave? Fundamentally and historically the SGI-USA has put the emphasis on structure, form and growth, i.e. numbers. Last year’s emphasis on 4-Divisional leadership, even where there were no possible candidates, and this year’s call for “Champion Districts” are prime examples. Despite everything Nichiren taught about it being “the heart that matters,” SGI can’t seem to catch on that measurement of growth is internal, and that teaching the law to others is not a campaign, but a natural, predictable outcome of the joy of experiencing the benefit of practice. Alas, conformity, counting and control reign in an organization that claims to foster equality, empowerment and enlightenment."