[NSRCA-discussion] 2015 Plenary Meeting

Thu Apr 16 11:52:48 AKDT 2015

I have to agree with Ron and Mark on this one.  The rationale for the proposal says that it would be the current, and upcoming list.  However, the way the rule change itself is actually worded allows for interpretation to be other than what the rationale provides.  The wording and the rationale are not consistent.

I'd recommend voting against this proposal, unless it is clarified to be in line with the rationale as stated. 

I note that the F3A subcommittee wrote this proposal, not any particular country.  Would be nice to know who was the primary author.

-----Original Message-----
From: Atwood, Mark via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
To: Ronald Van Putte <vanputter at gmail.com>; General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Thu, Apr 16, 2015 2:30 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 Plenary Meeting

 I tend to be in agreement with Ron on this one.  I understand the motivation to remove the word “Current”, as it creates some logistical problems with timing.  But they need to replace it with something less open ended, such as “Current, or immediately prior list…” so that the organizers can’t go back 15 years in time to a prior approved list to select a judge they happen to like who may or may not be active and current with the rules and sequences.   The changes as proposed give them way too much room to invite just about anyone that has ever been on any list.     

              MARK              ATWOOD            

               President              

               o.  (440) 229-2502              

               c.  (216) 316-2489              

               e.                 atwoodm at paragon-inc.com                             

               Paragon Consulting, Inc.                             

               5900 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 205, Cleveland Ohio, 44124              

               www.paragon-inc.com              

               Powering The Digital Experience              

On Apr 16, 2015, at 2:17 PM, Ronald Van Putte via NSRCA-discussion <    nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:   

      The items below have been extracted from the agenda of the 2015 CIAM Plenary Meeting       to be held in the Mövenpick Hotel - Lausanne (Switzerland)     

       on  Friday 24 April and Saturday 25 April 2015.      

       It is proposed that the words in Bold Oblique be removed from the appropriate section.      

       The result of the first deletion is that the organizing committee would not have to use names from the current list of international judges and may pick judges whose names are not on the list.      

       The second deletion is in line with the first deletion      

       The third deletion would remove the requirement for recent judging experience.      

      14.8 Section 4C Volume       F3 - RC Aerobatics     

aa) 5.9.10 c) Judging F3 Aero Subcommittee     

Amend the paragraph as follows:     

For World or Continental Championships the organiser must appoint one or more     

      panels of five judges each. The judges must be of different nationalities       and must be     

      selected from a current list of international Judges      . Those selected must reflect the     

approximate geographical distribution of teams having participated in the previous     

World Championships (if applicable) and the final list must be approved by the CIAM     

Bureau. At least one third, but not more than two thirds of the judges must not     

have judged at the previous World Championship. Judge assignment to the     

panels will be by random draw.     

Reason: Avoid doubling of the rule, see 5.9.10 d). The rule is meant to refer only to     

one, the latest previous World Championship. Adaption to F3A     

ab) 5.9.10 d) Judging F3 Aero Subcommittee     

Amend the paragraph as follows:     

      The invited judges for World or Continental Championships must be selected from       a     

      current       the applicable list of FAI international judges and must have had a     

      reasonable amount of F3P or F3A judging experience       within the previous twelve     

      months       and must submit a resume of his judging experience to the organiser when     

accepting the invitation to judge at a World or Continental Championship. The     

organiser must in turn submit the resumes to the CIAM Bureau for approval.     

Reason: Since the available number of international judges may be limited in a     

„current“ list, ie. a list becoming effective in the year of the championship actually     

held should also serve as a resource of appointable judges. Judging criteria in F3P     

are equal to F3A with both of them referring to the ANNEX 5B     

I am not in favor of the deletions and wonder what NSRCA’s and AMA’s plans are.     

Ron Van Putte     

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

_______________________________________________
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/20150416/a66e6290/attachment.html>