rules proposals final result

Mon May 10 10:27:51 AKDT 2004

Joe:
Your logic is inescapable.  I don't think those folks are existing in a 
vacuum.  They knew.  They knew.    Bill Glaze

Joe Lachowski wrote:

> Lance/Tony
>
> The results of the survey were published in the K-Factor, on the NSRCA 
> website, forwarded to the NSRCA Board, and forwarded to John Fuqua, 
> Contest Board Chairman.  In one way or the order the contest board had 
> access to the results.
>
> A number of the board members are NSRCA members. The should have seen 
> the results in the K-Factor. Also, John Fuqua could have forwarded the 
> results to the board members. Whether he did or didn't is another 
> story. I've got to believe based on these facts that the board members 
> had to have known  how the membership felt on all these issues.
>
>
>> From: "Tony Stillman" <tony at radiosouthrc.com>
>> Reply-To: discussion at nsrca.org
>> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>> Subject: Re: rules proposals final result
>> Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 09:01:14 -0500
>>
>> Lance:
>> On issue with the survey is that the survey results are not sent to the
>> contest board.  We use them to formulate rules proposals, and those 
>> are sent
>> to the board.
>>
>> Perhaps we are missing something here and should create a survey in 
>> such a
>> form that the Contest Board could read it and get a good "feel" for 
>> what the
>> pattern community is thinking....  This would then help them to better
>> prepare to vote with the interests of the pattern community at heart.
>>
>>
>> Tony Stillman
>> Radio South
>> 3702 N. Pace Blvd.
>> Pensacola, FL 32505
>> 1-800-962-7802
>> www.radiosouthrc.com
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <patterndude at comcast.net>
>> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 11:50 PM
>> Subject: Re: rules proposals final result
>>
>>
>> > 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.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> =====================================
>> # To be removed from this list, go to 
>> http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>> and follow the instructions.
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with 
> MSN Premium! 
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/mlb&pgmarket=en-us/go/onm00200439ave/direct/01/ 
>
>
> =====================================
> # 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.