Rules Proposals Final Vote

[Keith Black]

The comments that John makes about receiving nada from his district is quite troubling. Certainly there were at least SOME district V NSRCA members that voted on the rules survey, yet John feels he was given no input and was free to vote his "feelings".

So basically, the extensive survey was taken but it didn't identify how people from each district voted (or did it), therefore contest board members feel free to vote how they "feel". Sounds like a lawyer getting a case dismissed on a technicality. 

It's pretty clear that future rules surveys (if we ever bother to do one again) should be broken down by district, this way contest board members can't "claim" that no one from their district gave them any input. On the other hand, as things stand what's the point in doing the rules survey?

Personally I'll live with whatever is decided, but being a very logical person illogical behavior bothers me. When the majority of "active" participants wants something, demonstrates the majority wants it, then are ignored there is something wrong. 

This can also happen in a representative government. You Senator or Congressman doesn't have to vote the way you want them to, but at least with them the next time around you can kick them out of office!

Keith

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ron Van Putte 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 9:36 PM
  Subject: Re: Rules Proposals Final Vote


  John Fuqua asked me to forward the following to the NSRCA discussion list.

  Ron Van Putte

  Begin forwarded message:


    From: "John Fuqua" <johnfuqua at gdsys.net>
    Date: May 10, 2004 9:09:23 PM CDT
    To: "Ron Van Putte" <vanputte at cox.net>
    Subject: RE: rules proposals final result

    Please pass on to the group that the Board is an AMA Board not a NSRCA Board.  If we were an NSRCA Board Ron Van Putte's proposal on the annex system would not have been rejected by the AMA Excutive Council.   While I respect the NSRCA survey and look at the results I represent AMA District V not NSRCA District 3.  Same for the other Board members.  Just as the Board is not in lock step with me, or anybody else for that matter, the Board is not in lock step with the NSRCA nor should it be.  Each District member must feel out his District.  If he gets input from NSRCA members from his District than all the better.  Just for the record I received zero, nada, 0 written or email inputs from my District members on these proposals.  Others in my District have talked to me and there was no clear consensus one way or the other leaving me to vote my feelings.
     
    I submitted the takeoff and landing proposal, again, having had another of my district members submit it the last cycle where it failed.  Just like flying by class vice frequency of some years ago, some ideas take time to develop.  I think the proposal is superior to what we have now for a lot of reasons.  Go look at the rationale in the proposal to see the issues.  One last thought.  If takeoff and landing were aerobatic manuevers, the FAA would require all airline passengers to wear parachutes.
     
    John Fuqua
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Ron Van Putte [mailto:vanputte at cox.net]
    Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 6:38 PM
    To: John Fuqua
    Subject: Fwd: rules proposals final result

    John - FYI.

    Ron

    Begin forwarded message:


    From: patterndude at comcast.net
    Date: May 10, 2004 6:27:11 PM CDT
    To: discussion at nsrca.org
    Subject: Re: rules proposals final result
    Reply-To: discussion at nsrca.org


    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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040510/8cbfb616/attachment.html