Sequence Poll Results

[Ron Van Putte]

On Jan 3, 2005, at 11:12 AM, Bill Glaze wrote:

>  Opinion polls are a great idea, and are surely indicative of the 
> wishes of  the membership, both pro and con.  Among many things, it 
> gives the membership the idea that they are valued, and they are 
> participating in the direction of pattern, helping to get it to grow.  
> That's to the good.
>  However--and this is obvious, but needs to be pointed out again and 
> again--if these wishes aren't heeded, then there is a resentment built 
> that will be hard to make go away.  One particular thing I'm talking 
> about, is the wishes of those in the lower classes to have more 
> frequent schedule changes.  Completely disregarded by the powers in 
> charge of such things, those of us in that category felt, at least in 
> the case of several I have spoken with, a disenfranchisement.  Kind of 
> a "why bother?  Nobody's really listening."  The constant refrain of 
> those in charge of such things seems to be "well, those classes are 
> transitory in nature; why should we bother with changes."  "The flyer 
> in Intermediate this year, will be in Advanced next year".  This 
> faulty thinking, or "one size fits all" attitude is harmful to those 
> who are desperately interested in Pattern, and want to see it grow.  I 
> feel that,  until  it can be demonstrated that there is no "double 
> standard" those of us stuck in the lower classes will continue to feel 
> a degree of being left out.  And, it's so easy to remedy. Anyway, 
> that's the way I  see it.

There are at least two ways to get rules changes passed.  First, we can 
rely on the NSRCA leaders to put together surveys, establish committees 
to develop maneuver schedules and submit proposed schedules to AMA.  
OR, we can individually put together rule changes and/or maneuver 
schedule changes for submittal to AMA.  Either way has a presumably 
equal chance of getting passed by the Contest Board, because NSRCA 
doesn't have an inside track with the Contest Board.  Sure, NSRCA can 
lobby the Contest Board to pass their rule change proposals, but the 
Board can also ignore the lobbying, as it did in the last cycle.  It 
often takes several cycles to get proposed changes passed, as it did 
with takeoff direction being the pilot's option.  It took three tries 
to get that one passed.

I mention all the above, because a lot of the comments in this forum 
are about what someone else should do to implement rule and/or maneuver 
schedule changes to satisfy the writer.  If a writer feels strongly 
enough about making changes, it is incumbent on him/her to take action 
in that direction; they should write a rule change proposal and submit 
it.  It isn't rocket science.

BTW, I don't mean to include Bill in the 'inactive whiner' group, but 
his note triggered my 'response button' on this issue.

Ron Van Putte
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 2803 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050103/d9f13a26/attachment-0001.bin