[NSRCA-discussion] Proposals Survey

[Dave Harmon]

Probably zero the whole flight after that!

 

Dave Harmon

NSRCA 586

K6XYZ[at]sbcglobal[dot]net

Sperry, Ok.

 

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bob Richards
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2012 7:08 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposals Survey

 


.... and to make sure the pilot is not "armed" the panties must be on the ground when not flying. As soon as a flight is finished, he/she must drop panties in front of the judges.

 

:-)

 

Bob R.



--- On Fri, 2/17/12, Keith Hoard <khoard at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Keith Hoard <khoard at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposals Survey
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Friday, February 17, 2012, 11:52 PM

Geeze, now I have to come up with another rules proposal:

 

  A pattern competitor’s “panties” must be in the Full and Extended position from the time his aircraft enters the ready box, until the caller retrieves his airplane after an official flight.  If a competitors panties become “wadded” during a flight, the judges will immediately direct the pilot to land his airplane and all maneuvers following the “wadding” will be scored Zero.

 


Keith Hoard
Collierville, TN
khoard at gmail.com 

 

From: Scott McHarg <http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=scmcharg@gmail.com>  

Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 9:25 PM

To: General pattern discussion <http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>  

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposals Survey

 

Hi Dan,
   It just makes more work for me (which I'm sure Keith H. would enjoy greatly as he seems to have his panties in a wad).  We have several filters in place so I'll just filter out the duplicate entries.  We will know who is trying to "pad the results".  There were several folks that were having trouble accessing the system so we had to remove the one time per user.  Either way, only the initial entry will be taken and if a bunch go in just to screw it up for everyone, we'll just shut it down.  You're right, it makes it a bit useless when people do that.

Have a good weekend,
Scott

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Dan Curtis <warrior523 at att.net <http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=warrior523@att.net> > wrote:

Guys,

 

When the survey was put up on the website I filled it out and submitted my answers.  Then I could not get back in to the survey.  Which I assume was to stop a person from voting more than once.  Well, I was on the website earlier tonight and for the heck of it I hit the survey link and low and behold I was back in and was able to fill the survey out again.  If I hit submit, I get the results sumitted message.  It appears that a person can vote as many times as they see fit now.  I had another person or two try the same thing with the same results.  Is this feature okay or is it making the survey results a bit useless?

 

It may still be only countng the first time you voted or submitted but that is not the way it appears.  Anybody got an answer???

 

Dan


_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org> 
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion




-- 
Scott A. McHarg


  _____  


_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org> 
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20120220/0131b6c3/attachment.html>