Bigger issues--Long as usual from me

[Wayne Galligan]

Righto Mate....Bud light would be fine wit me.  Hell any beer would be fine
with me.

Wayne G.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Weimer, Claude" <cweimer at wilkinson-mfg.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 4:47 PM
Subject: RE: Bigger issues--Long as usual from me


I think all this AMA bashing should stop and everyone should go have a
Fosters.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Glaze [mailto:billglaze at triad.rr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 5:42 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Bigger issues--Long as usual from me

Jerry:  Yes! to yours below!
BTW: is it necessary for the Contest Board to speak with an Austrian
accent?<G>  Probably not, but if they looked like Arnold, I sure
wouldn't want to cross them!

Bil Glaze

Jerry Budd wrote:

> Actually Bill, I've never even been to an IMAC contest (I'm a hard
> core pattern guy who fell in love with the pattern planes on the Nats
> cover of Model Aviation back in the late 70's).
>
> However, simple logic suggests that NSRCA can completely control it's
> own destiny wrt AMA approval if NSRCA is simply willing to show a
> little perseverance and take a firm stand on matters of importance.
> AMA has almost no leverage over NSRCA once one realizes that AMA needs
> NSRCA a whole lot more than NSRCA needs AMA.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I don't have a fundamental problem with an AMA
> Pattern Contest Board legislating on AMA matters, I just think that a
> 3 year rules cycle process is utterly absurd.
>
> Hell, in California we can elect and then recall a Governor in less
> time than that!
>
> : )
>
> Jerry
>
>
>> Jerry:
>> You are absolutely correct in your assessment of what IMAC did--it's
>> almost as if you were there, (instead of out flying pattern!<G>)
>> Your further statements are in line with my sentiments.
>>
>> Bill Glaze
>>
>> Jerry Budd wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ron,
>>>
>>> I don't believe that AMA "inadvertently" gave the IMAC folks
>>> control, they (AMA) simply didn't have any choice in the matter. The
>>> word I'm getting is that the IMAC community was fully willing to
>>> break away from AMA if that was what it was going to take to get
>>> what they (IMAC) reasonably wanted.  At that point AMA is faced with
>>> having some control or no control.  Saying AMA "inadvertently lost
>>> control" is at best "spin" and at worst a lie.
>>>
>>> I just don't understand why we (NSRCA) are willing to simply lie
>>> down and get run over on this by AMA.
>>>
>>> Do you have any idea why?
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>>
>>>> As far as I can tell, NSRCA will do all the annex work and the
>>>> contest board will only "sprinkle holy water" on our work.  I do
>>>> not believe that the contest board members (most are NSRCA members)
>>>> would ever put a veto on anything we wanted to do.  It's just that
>>>> the AMA hierarchy is unwilling to relinquish any more control over
>>>> the rule book than they' inadvertently gave the IMACers in the last
>>>> cycle.  The process WILL take longer, because it takes time to
>>>> "sprinkle holy water".
>>>>
>>>> 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.
#
============# 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.
#