To excuse it (the event DV magazine article) by calling it "a poorly worded article" is misleading. This was a series of two articles and they ran several months ago, giving the author and publisher plenty of time to clear up any accidental misconceptions, yet I am aware of no such efforts.
I can't explain why the author of that article hasn't done more to clear up any possible misconceptions, but I'm confident from the research I've done about this that he is being misinterpreted on these forums. I've encouraged you to contact Mike Nelson directly to ask him in person about this, which would be the decent thing to do given the controversy you're generating on the topic. Expecting him to come here of his own accord to comment isn't quite fair: as the author of your own article you could make the first move.
As for whether WEVA promotes profit at an unfair cost to customers, I see no viable justification for that. Part of what WEVA does promote is charging a fair price for the amount of work done and not giving away one's services below their real value, something many fledgling videographers do. Mike Nelson may push this concept beyond a point most of us find comfortable, but I've heard from someone who knows him personally that he does this in a way which is not a problem for his customers. I haven't heard directly from Mike himself, but his office is just a phone call away...
P.S. I'd say that most wedding videographers are underpaid for the amount of time and effort they put in, so let's not rush to judgment on the ones who have found ways to earn a decent living.
