Rules Proposals Final Vote

[Ron Van Putte]

On May 11, 2004, at 12:12 AM, Lance Van Nostrand wrote:

> Ron,
> John's post is interesting, and provides insight into his 
> perspective.  My response is:
> 1. We recognize that the AMA CB is independent and should vote in a 
> way that represents their district.  It is part of the CB member's job 
> to understand the sentiment of his district.  It's not the members 
> responsibility to find him.  Without this input, he is voting 
> personally from an appointed position (not democratic).
>  
> 2. It is totally reasonable that he might prefer non-judged TO/L.  In 
> fact 17% of the survey respondents agree with that position.  However, 
> with "nada" input from his district, how can he conclude that an 
> overwhelmingly unpopular opinion is the will of his constituents?

I forwarded this e-mail to John Fuqua.

As a co-signer of the proposal, I can speak for myself.  I signed to 
proposal because I believe that it's in the best interest of the NSRCA. 
  I agree with the rationale in the proposal (everybody read that, 
right?).  My position in the NSRCA nothing to do with my rights as an 
individual to support a proposal, regardless of what is contained in 
the results of an NSRCA survey.  Even so, the results of the NSRCA 
survey WERE sent to the contest board.

We've had 'flaps' like this before.  Two which come to mind are flying 
by frequency, not class and takeoff direction being the contestant's 
choice.  The first was opposed by the majority and dire consequences 
were predicted.  The second took three cycles through the contest board 
before it passed because there was so much opposition.  Can anyone 
visualize going back to the way contests were run before these rule 
changes were implemented?  I predict the same thing will happen 
regarding non-judged takeoff and landing.

Ron Van Putte

----- 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 --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 5657 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040511/5bb6ff70/attachment.bin