Rules changes - NSRCA Register

Fri Nov 14 09:20:13 AKST 2003

I agree with Eric that we should initially only send the proposals that pass
the NSRCA vote, then after the proposal deadline submit results for any
proposals made outside of the NSRCA proposals. This will prevent confusion
and keep from passing along a lot of non-pertinent information. The more
stuff we give the contest board the less likely it is to be studied
thoroughly.

The idea of including non-NSRCA members in the poll is an excellent idea.

Keith Black

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Henderson,Eric" <Eric.Henderson at gartner.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:56 AM
Subject: RE: Rules changes - NSRCA Register

Tony,
      It's a mechanical issue. For example. Do you send the whole survey
with each of the 30 plus proposals? Do you send in one proposal with all of
the changes and ask for a multiple AMA contest board vote. Or perhaps one
copy of the 60 plus questions and answers survey and hope that they cross
reference.

We did publish all of the results in the K-factor. I think that all of the
AMA contest board members were NSRCA members or emeritus.

Also it is second-guessing to send in all of the Not-voted-for stuff just
in-case a proposal comes in from one of the did-not pass-voters or
completely out of the blue. You could still send it to them - it's not too
late.

The bigger issue still stands. "Do we represent pattern" and "Should the AMA
veto our proposals because we can't prove we represent the AMA membership as
well as the NSRCA membership."

All the NSRCA has to do is enter competing pattern pilots as non-members on
the NSRCA database and use that as a distribution list for the next survey.
(It would also tell you /us how many potential members we have not yet
recruited). It is not that hard to do if the horse is willing!

Regards,

Eric.

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Tony Stillman
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:56 AM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Rules changes - NSRCA Register

Eric:

One of the "helps" could have been to submit the results of the entire
survey to the NSRCA board.  This way, they could see what members wanted,
and didn't want.

If you only send what is proposed as a change, but no other info, a rules
proposal that conflicts with the result of the survey can easily pass, or at
least be considered.....

Just food for thought...

Tony Stillman
Radio South
3702 N. Pace Blvd.
Pensacola, FL 32505
1-800-962-7802
www.radiosouthrc.com
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Henderson,Eric" <Eric.Henderson at gartner.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 8:36 AM
Subject: RE: Rules changes - NSRCA Register

Ref my previous note.  I can't state a problem with out at least a possible
solution.

There is a way to address the representation issue. That is to recruit all
of the pattern pilots into the NSRCA.

I fully believe that we have to focus more on being a SIG than being a
pattern society. A society tends to get focused on the number of members
etc. A SIG represents the special interests of its group. To represent you
need to capture the interest of all of the folks doing pattern.

We should face that fact that we will never get everyone to join the NSRCA.
What we could do is REGISTER everyone that enters and competes in a pattern
contest. Then we would have a database of everyone. Then we could send then
the SIG (NSRCA) survey. The we would have polled all known interested
parties on behalf of the AMA contest board.`

We have a database of NSRCA members that could easily handle the addition of
non-members. All we have to do is get CD's to copy us on the contest
entrants list. The same one we (CD's) send to the AMA.

We would not send these people K-Factors nor would we include them in NSRCA
championships etc. BUT we would have the capability to send them our rules
proposal survey and get their vote. Bear in mind that survey is designed to
get data to support proposals to the (their) AMA RC Aerobatics Contest
board. We leave ourselves open to a lot of problems if we do not include all
of those with OUR special interest.

One side effect might be, that as "Registered RC aerobatic pilots" they
might be encouraged to become NSRCA members as well.

Especially when they see the good work that we do.

Regards,

Eric.

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Henderson,Eric
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 9:04 AM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Rules changes - NSRCA role.

Keith,
       When a Rules/maneuver proposal is submitted you are required to state
the logic for the proposal. This time around we split the writing work
between Tom Weedon and myself. Any proposals with our names on were stated
as voted for by the NSRCA membership. The proposal has to actually come from
an AMA member and be co-signed by two other members in good standing.

There are BIG problems that comes into play once any NSRCA proposal has been
submitted to the AMA contest board.

1. Lobbying of the AMA contest board by those folks who are against the
proposals. You would think that NSRCA members would respect the vote of
their society. This is not the case and even though I agree that we have the
right to lobby our contest board with what we feel is right, it is does get
very illogical when one member can privately lobby and destroy a proposal
voted for by the NSRCA. I even saw an NSRCA member who voted for a proposal
subsequently go the other way and lobby the whole AMA contest board!

2. AMA RC contest board members represent AMA members and often feel that
not all AMA members are represented in the proposals. Said another way
Non-NSRCA members are not represented. Charlie Reed, a very conscientious
AMA board member, went so far as to do his own poll of his AMA district to
see how they felt. The weakness of what he did was that he only contacted
who he knew flew pattern.

3. The AMA contest board can make or insist on changes or compromises that
the NSRCA membership never get a chance to vote on. Three years of
democratically produced and supported work can go down the tubes at the
hands of one man.

One problem that I also see is that this time the AMA contest board
Chairman, John Fuqua, submitted his own proposals for rules change. None of
which were NSRCA proposals.

Go figure how the board vote can be fair if the proposal is from the chair?

Knowing how sausage is made has made it hard for me to enjoy my sport.

Regards,

Eric.

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Keith Black
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 7:24 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Landings and Take-off's - The vote!.:

I would hope that the contest board members are privy to all the facts so
they can make the best decisions. For example, if 80% of the NSRCA members
vote against eliminating scored takeoff and landings, and we DON'T include
it on our rules change proposal to the AMA, but an individual submits their
own proposal for this change and gets a few friends to email the contest
board I'd hope they would be aware that 80% of the NSRCA are against it. If
they only knew about the one guy that submitted it and his friends emails
then they my unwittingly vote for something that 80% of the NSRCA are
against.

Seems to me that the best way for the NSRCA to serve it's membership is to
have an NSRCA poll of all private proposals not included on the NSRCA rule
change proposal. This poll would be taken after the deadline to submit
proposals to the AMA, but before the contest board meets to vote on the
proposals. The results of this poll would then be given to the contest board
so they would know the NSRCA's opinion on all proposals, regardless of
originator.

Therefore, if I submitted a rule to drop half point scoring and I got
everyone in my flying club (sport fliers included) to send the contest board
emails demanding this, then the NSRCA membership wouldn't get blind sided by
this proposal. I know we can all do this individually if we make the effort
to look up the proposals and send emails to our district rep., but it would
be much more effective as a group and the participation would be greater
than just expecting everyone to research and email on their own.

I guess you could call this the NSRCA "watch dog" approach.

Keith

============# 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.
#

============# 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.
#