rules proposals final result

[Tony Stillman]

Lance:
While I understand your position, I also understand that NSRCA does not
dictate rules to AMA for Pattern.  Maybe they should, but they don't.
Because of that, ANY open AMA member can AND SHOULD submit rules proposals
as they see fit.

It is then important that quality people be appointed by the AMA VP to serve
as contest board members.

They then get to vote.

There have been several times that I didn't agree with an NSRCA proposal,
but because I was the NSRCA President, I didn't submit an optional proposal.
However, if I was not an officer and felt like a rule needed to be made, I
should be free to submit any rules proposal that I want.

Tony Stillman
Radio South
3702 N. Pace Blvd.
Pensacola, FL 32505
1-800-962-7802
www.radiosouthrc.com
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <patterndude at comcast.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: rules proposals final result


> John,
> The interesting thing is that the RCA05-05 TO/L rule change was submitted
by an NSRCA member that had full knowledge of the NSRCA survey results.  The
NSRCA survey is designed to collect the opinions of the membership and we
tend to view it as a democratic process. But given the hierarchical
reporting of the SIG to the AMA, someone not falling in step with the survey
results cna submit a proposal which gets the same consideration and
visibility as change proposals submitted by this SIG as a result of the
survey.
>    If this doesn't change, then it is doubly important that there is an
active communication channel from the NSRCA to the contest board members.  I
applaud Don Atwood for thinking, reflecting, soliciting input and voting.  I
wish I knew how the others prepared for their vote.  I fear that they may
just assume that if the proposal came from an NSRCA member, then it reflects
the will of the SIG.
> --Lance
>
> --
> District 6 AVP
> www.aeroslave.com
> > It would be very interesting to hear the reasoning behind the votes.
> > Is it:
> >  apathy?
> >  ignorance?
> >  some logical reasoning?
> >  an effort to restrict interest & growth?
> >  some personal vendetta?
> >  a perceived threat to AMA or some element thereof?
> >  jealousy?
> >  or maybe even a just a need to show who is really the boss....
> >  All of the above?
> >
> > Considering how helpful and considerate some of the Muncie folks are, I
know
> > the apparent hostility to the Pattern discipline is not unanimous.
> > Perhaps the intended message is that the NSRCA exists to serve the AMA
> > rather than the membership. The only viable relationship is for the
NSRCA to
> > be positioned to serve both.
> >
> > Perhaps the time has come for two sets of rules... Nats Rules(AMA) and
NSRCA
> > Rules. The NSRCA rules would reflect the needs of the membership. The
> > management of the governing body (AMA) has abandoned the responsibility
of
> > leadership.
> >
> > We can allow the current rulings to weaken us or we can use the
adversarial
>
> > position to strengthen us. If we allow the rulings to divide us, we are
sure
> > to lose whatever clout we have now. If we hang together, we can make
this a
> > battle they will regret winning.
> >
> > John Ferrell
> > http://DixieNC.US
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Ron Van Putte" <vanputte at cox.net>
> > To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > Cc: "John Fuqua" <johnfuqua at gdsys.net>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 10:41 PM
> > Subject: Re: rules proposals final result
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On May 6, 2004, at 9:26 PM, Atwood, Mark wrote:
> > >
> > > > That was decided BEFORE this vote.  It was NOT on the ballot (Since
> > > > I'm new to the process I can't answer why...I just know I didn't get
> > > > to vote on it (I surely would have said just...I've wanted it for a
> > > > long time)
> > >
> > > I submitted the initial proposal, which included an annex of maneuver
> > > descriptions and maneuver schedules, controlled by the NSRCA.  Steve
> > > Kaluf sent it to the AMA Executive Council, recommending that they
>
> > > refuse to accept it, so they did.  I was so PO'd that I washed my
hands
> > > of it.  John Fuqua and Tony Stillman took the proposal and rewrote it,
> > > giving the R/C Aerobatics contest board final approval of anything
> > > NSRCA came up with (we can't be trusted to write maneuver descriptions
> > > and schedules without parental supervision).  The vote on that
proposal
> > > failed because some of the contest board members FAILED TO VOTE.
> > > That's why we are where we are.
> > >
> > > Ron Van Putte
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > =====================================
> > # To be removed from this list, go to
http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> > and follow the instructions.
> >
>
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>
>
>


=====================================
# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.