rules proposals final result

Mon May 10 15:27:11 AKDT 2004

Joe,
and what would you do as a board member if your board chairman used his bully pulpit to submit a proposal at odds with the NSRCA?
--Lance

--
District 6 AVP
www.aeroslave.com
> 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/0
> 1/
> 
> =====================================
> # 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.