Weight

[Del Rykert]

My mail just brought a K Factor that says Sept./Oct so I guess that Aug.,
has been dropped. I don't recall anything being addressed on what issues
were or weren't going to be coming. If no fodder for the mill then no reason
for an added expense I guess.

I'll take it to work tomorrow and maybe get a chance to read it..

     Del K. Rykert
     AMA - 8928
     NSRCA - 473
     Kb2joi - General
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Ferrell" <johnferrell at earthlink.net>
To: <vanputte at nuc.net>; <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 7:05 AM
Subject: Re: Weight


> Herding cats was only one dimension of the problems encountered. All of
the
> committee members were right, all of the ideas had merit but all could not
> be endorsed because many were conflicting.
>
> There were times when I felt things were falling apart because committee
> members were withdrawing. As it turns out, that was the best thing they
> could do with the circumstance at hand.
>
> I gained a lot of respect for all who participated in the process, not
just
> those I found in agreement with my positions on issues. In the long run my
> position never counted anyway. The role of the Chair is to conduct the
> business, not direct it.
>
> In the end, all submitted issues were placed before the membership. The
> entire dues paying membership had an opportunity to vote on those issues.
> The process was executed as intended. The Rules Committee accepted all but
> one tiny change in the Intermediate Sequence. The apparent frustration of
> the membership is unwarranted.
>
> Eric choose to do things differently this last cycle. IF he made an error,
> it was failing to get started earlier on the process.
> I don't find that an error. The task tends to expand to whatever time is
> allotted. He assumed the burden himself and in my opinion achieved the
same
> process in a more efficient manner. The question is more a matter of
> establishing credibility. While the previous cycle was done by committee
and
> each step was public, the individual effort was swift & quiet. The result
> was essentially the same.
>
> The only thing I find troubling is that there was a set of sequences
> developed in subcommittee that were not adopted. The only purpose they
> served was to provide competition for the set that won approval. Since
they
> were developed by a competent and dedicated group I would like to point
out
> that they are available for future use on short notice. I really hate to
see
> that work wasted. Rather than a "winner" and a "loser" set I find it more
> appealing to change the question to "who goes first". Even after the fact.
>
> BTW, my dues are going out in today's mail. Its time to get them in!
>
> John Ferrell
> 6241 Phillippi Rd
> Julian NC 27283
> Phone: (336)685-9606
> Dixie Competition Products
> NSRCA 479 AMA 4190  W8CCW
> "My Competition is Not My Enemy"
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ron Van Putte" <vanputte at nuc.net>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 10:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Weight
>
>
> > I agree with everything John wrote here.  Being the rule change
> > committee chairman, as he was, is very difficult.  He was trying to get
> > a group of opinionated, strong willed people to get out a job and meet a
> > schedule.  It was kind of like "herding cats", wasn't it John?
> >
> > Ron Van Putte
> > Member of Team A
> > Rule Change Committee
> >
>
> =====================================
> # 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.
#