rules proposals final result

[Lance Van Nostrand]

Tony,
No, I don't think you understand my position.  In re-reading my note, I
might not have been totally clear.  Here is a quote, " The NSRCA survey is
designed to collect the opinions of the membership and we tend to view it as
a democratic process."  I think the NSRCA survey provided needed opinions
and most all of these were turned into proposals to be submitted to the next
level up: the contest board.
   What get me is that we are not working together as a team to make the
best of the AMA processes and do right for the NSRCA.  I don't know you
well, but I don't see you as subversive in the least.  I don't believe that
you would end run an NSRCA survey and submit your own proposal when the
popular vote disagreed with your personal opinion.
--Lance
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tony Stillman" <tony at radiosouthrc.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: rules proposals final result


> 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.
>

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