Annex Proposal

[Bob Pastorello]

For those not familiar - on RC Universe (www.rcuniverse.com) there is an entire FORUM dedicated to "AMA Issues"....If you have some time to kill, go browse...
    You'll see that there appears to be a "trend" developing in how the EC views, endorses, legislates, controls and directs C-O-M-P-E-T-I-T-I-O-N....  perhaps there is waning interest on THEIR side for the "high maintenance" (read administrative expense/overhead) SIGs....

Of course, I don't *know*....just speculating a bit....

Bob Pastorello  IMAC 1320
NSRCA 199, AMA 46373
rcaerobob at cox.net
www.rcaerobats.net


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Buddy Brammer 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 7:03 PM
  Subject: Re: Annex Proposal


  Ron 

  I think you should post your original of this thread on the NSRCA site with bold letters and an eye catching Icon of someone doing something un appropriate to us,  just in case there are those who visit the site but don't take part in the discussion forum who may be intrested.

  Another place that it could be posted is R/C Universe I feel sure that it is monitored by many who may be intrested also

  Sorry I couldn't find the proper Icon 

  Buddy



  >From: "Mike Hester" 
  >Reply-To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  >To: 
  >Subject: Re: Annex Proposal 
  >Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:03:36 -0800 
  > 
  > 
  >----- Original Message ----- 
  >From: "Ron Van Putte" 
  >To: 
  >Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 9:32 AM 
  >Subject: Re: Annex Proposal 
  > 
  > 
  > > Jerry Stebbins wrote: 
  > > 
  > > > Ron, it appears to me that we should let the AMA process run it's 
  > > > course. Let them make their decision based on the facts, and put it out 
  > > > for all to examine. Then we should have the opportunity to demand a 
  > > > truthful, and logical response to the process, and the basis for their 
  > > > decision. The Board is, by definition, supposed to be responsive to the 
  > > > Membership! 
  > > > I am against any compromise that has no rationale as to why the proposed 
  > > > approach is wrong.We have the IMAC precident on our side.If we 
  > > > compromise, then that says our proposal is not sound. 
  > > > Because Steve and Dave have some kind of insight, I wonder what/who is 
  > > > driving this decision. I would rather have them ( the Board ) explain, 
  > > > if they reject the proposal out of hand, why they are discriminating 
  > > > between the SIG's, and then we can determine the action, legal or 
  > > > otherwise, that we want to take. 
  > > 
  > > Does anyone not agree with the above? 
  > > 
  > > Ron Van Putte 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > ===================================== 
  > > # To be removed from this list, send a message to 
  > > # discussion-request at nsrca.org 
  > > # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body. 
  > > # 
  > > 
  > 
  >===================================== 
  ># To be removed from this list, send a message to 
  ># discussion-request at nsrca.org 
  ># and put leave discussion on the first line of the body. 
  ># 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  MSN 8 helps ELIMINATE E-MAIL VIRUSES. Get 2 months FREE*. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20021208/593e66e0/attachment.html