[NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals

[Dave Lockhart]

I would be interested to hear from the NSRCA BOD why the prior practice is being changed or ignored?  Or, if simply overlooked, if the 2 proposals will be retracted (which is easy enough to do).

 

Regards,

 

Dave

 

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of ronlock at comcast.net
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2012 3:43 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals

 

It has been the practice that NSRCA formally submitted proposals that attained a 60% "pass" in NSRCA survey results.

Rational being not making changes that were preferred by only a small margin

 

Ron Lockhart

  _____  

From: "Stuart Chale" <schale1 at verizon.net>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, March 9, 2012 12:31:52 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals

It really looks like 2 proposals were supported by the group that voted, and 2 proposals were pretty much 50/50  I would defer to a statistician to determine if the slight margin has any statistical significance.  I know it doesn't on one and doubt it does on the other.   Does the NSRCA really want to support (and therefore likely have passed) 2 proposals that if 1 person voted the other way on one and 4 people voted the other way on the other would have resulted in a majority voting against?

I strongly urge the powers that be take a closer look at these two proposals before "pushing" them through on half the voters that didn't want them.  The results are too close to say that "we" are in favor of them.

Stuart Chale

On 3/8/2012 3:50 PM, Scott McHarg wrote: 

Hello, 

   As promised, here are the raw results of the survey.  107 unique individuals took the survey.  Individuals that felt it necessary to vote multiple times had their responses deleted and only their original answers accepted.  Based, in part, to Dean Pappas' post on RCU and through the comments listed there, through email, phone conversation, discussion on this list and in person, the Safety Proposal was adjusted to the "What" instead of the "How".  The new Safety Proposal will be posted shortly on the NSRCA website.  The NSRCA BoD met last night to vote on these candidate proposals.  The original Safety proposal was taken off the table (the one that you saw in the survey) and the new proposal was then voted on.  Based on survey results, District VP interaction with his constituents and posts on RCU as well as this NSRCA discussion list, the BoD unanimously passed the new Safety Proposal, the Class Advancement as well as the Telemetry proposal for submittal to the AMA Rules Committee.  The Weight proposal also passed with a vote of 9 to 1.  

 

   We would like to thank those of you who took the survey and appreciate not only the time that it took for you to fill out the survey, but your dedication to this hobby.  The Rules Proposals will now be sent to the AMA for further review and discussion.  Attached are the survey results both in raw (all members) and NSRCA members only form.  I have also attached all four of the proposals again (with the new Safety Proposal) for your consumption.

 

Thank you again,

Scott



-- 
Scott A. McHarg





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





No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> 
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4858 - Release Date: 03/08/12


_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at 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/20120311/0fc1b263/attachment.html>