rules proposals final result

Mon May 10 10:43:30 AKDT 2004

On May 10, 2004, at 1:18 PM, Joe Lachowski wrote:

> 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.

Everything Joe said above is correct.,  John Fuqua did make the survey  
results available to the rest of the board.

Ron Van Putte
>
>
>> 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.