Bigger issues--Long as usual from me

[Henderson,Eric]

I agree with you and especially your conclusion.

E.

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Troy Newman
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 12:17 AM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Bigger issues--Long as usual from me


I'm not condemning your actions or the actions of anyone else....Rather I'm
saying the current process is poor.

Its long and drawn out...I also know that the process caught us off guard
this past cycle. There were so many huge changes the time before...We were
still waiting for them to take effect. By the time the next cycle came up it
seems like there is a very short time to evaluate the changes made the
previous cycle...as in less than a single seasons flying and yet the CB and
the AMA process takes 2+ years to do its work....

The first contests with the current rules changes were in 2002 yet 8months
later the changes for the next cycle were due.....How can this be evaluated
properly...I submit that it can't be properly evaluated. I know the NSRCA
needs to be involved in the rules process.

Just think we could do something better that's all.

TN

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Henderson,Eric" <Eric.Henderson at gartner.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 11:47 PM
Subject: RE: Bigger issues--Long as usual from me


Troy,
  Didn't mean to open up Pandora's box. The initial question was asked
"Could someone explain the rules change process?". My note was intended to
just show everyone how long and drawn out the process is. It also has many
opportunities in it for contribution. Sometimes the contribution helps a
proposal and sometimes it does not.

It can take 4-5 years from idea to implementation. That does seem a long
time to me. It's the same process for a small rule  correction as it is for
a complete change in schedules. In the case of your schedule it might have
been a good idea to do a re-survey, perhaps we should have gotten together
on that. (Hindsight being 20/20 of course). The problem that you run into is
that there is a drop dead date that the AMA applies rigorously and we never
seem to have enough time to get it right. In your case was not produced in
time to get an NSRCA vote prior to the AMA deadline. Looking at how things
work we could have put them up for an NSRCA vote and sent the data in prior
to the Contest Board "initial vote". (20/20 again)

When I wrote out the whole process it struck me that the NSRCA does a
tremendous amount of work to find out what the membership wants and then
those wishes run a perilous gamut. Just my opinion. It get very much like
the popular vote versus the electoral college system. We could argue that
one for ever - not an invite BTW.

The NSRCA mission also has the more recent addition of being an official AMA
SIG. There are roles and responsibilities associated with being a SIG that
also fall into the rules process. We can't expect the AMA to have staff to
take care every issue of every competition class. So they use SIG's.

You should volunteer to get actively involved with the next rule cycle.
Believe it or not it won't be very long before we need to start working on
2008..

Regards,

Eric.




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