Rules Proposals Final Vote

[cameron]

And I bet you wouldn't want your friends to go thru it either! 

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
On Behalf Of Del Rykert
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 8:35 AM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Rules Proposals Final Vote


Isn't it amazing how those who have been burned either literally or
figuratively have strong opinions. I also have been hit with a model and
it carried me 15 feet and slide another 15 feet. It was 60 powered. No
picnic and one I care not to repeat. 
 
                         del 
               NSRCA - 473

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jerry Stebbins <mailto:JAStebbins at worldnet.att.net>  
To: discussion at nsrca.org 
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: Rules Proposals Final Vote

John's comments are interesting, but not totally correct. 
I would assume that the info on the survey was "districtable" and
therefore each rep could/should have found out how his membership voted.
If not, one could assume a % by allocation and be close. In any case you
would not expect the proposer to vote against his own proposal, or those
of his compatriots. Also I would generally not expect the board members
to vote against the Chairman's proposal, supported by NSRCA execs. or on
their poposals, unless they had some very strong opposition expressed to
them.
I expressed my comments verbally to John several times at contests, both
factual rebuttals of his "rationale", and the legal implications of
someone getting hit under a new rule that reduced the criteria, and need
for takeoff "control". My mistake was to delete the long,and specific,
comments I wrote and then deleted, after deciding they had all been
previously expressed. I should have, at least , documented them for the
record.
  I have been hit, and had to duck several times, while judging, over
the past 11 years, and did not like it. Demonstration of control of the
plane on the ground, and in the air is a basic Safety precept, and I
think this sends the wrong message to the pilots. One takeoff this year
at Pensacola was at right angles to the runway--luckily out, but the
judges sure flinched!!!!!!!
No reason to duck, jus don"t judge!!!!!!
Jerry----- Original Message ----- 

From: Lance Van Nostrand <mailto:patterndude at comcast.net>  
To: discussion at nsrca.org 
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 12:12 AM
Subject: Re: Rules Proposals Final Vote

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?
 
--Lance 

  **  Klipped for reposting ** 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040512/b532ffbf/attachment.html