<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV></DIV>
<DIV>We miss you, we'll let you fly if you came back next year :) . . . .<BR> </DIV>Bob Kane<BR>getterflash@yahoo.com
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><BR><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">----- Original Message ----<BR>From: brian young <brian_w_young@yahoo.com><BR>To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 11:11:23 PM<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging<BR><BR>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I always try to score what I see and give a full range of scores, and initial my score sheet. doing this quite a while now and have never been grilled by a contestant..nor have I grilled a judge...but grilled a nice steak at D4 Champs 1 Year.....man thats a good contest. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><B><I>Lance Van Nostrand <patterndude@comcast.net></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Keith,<BR>This is a fun hobby. I submit that if you are afraid to give an accurate <BR>score that you witnessed then you are doing a disservice. At a local <BR>contest you are kidding yourself if you think you have any anonymity. <BR>Instead of pretending its there, some cool discussion will raise the level <BR>of pilot and judge. One big difference between a local and Nats is that at <BR>a local its highly likely that we will fly in front of the same person that <BR>we'll later judge. If there were some kind of inappropriate judging going <BR>on, this is a natural damper. Since this damper is not in place at the <BR>Nats, that might change the checks and balances.<BR><BR>I don't see anyone joining this discussion. Even JimW has not responded. I <BR>think we are in "no man's land". Thanks for responding.<BR><BR>--Lance<BR><BR>----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: "Keith
Black" <BR>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <BR>Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 10:22 PM<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging<BR><BR><BR>> Lance, you make some very good points. For me this is a tough issue with <BR>> two<BR>> very strong arguments on opposite sides.<BR>><BR>> Simply put:<BR>><BR>> Pro> If judges initials score sheets they'll be more conscientious about<BR>> their judging and less incline to gouge someone they don't like.<BR>><BR>> Con> If judges initial score sheets they may be hesitant to give deserved<BR>> low scores to big name pilots and may fear retribution when they fly.<BR>><BR>> I think the Con is probably the more persuasive of these two points, at<BR>> least at the NATS level, because when judges are required to put their <BR>> judge<BR>> number they still know they're accountable, but will be comfortable giving<BR>> deserved low scores without fear of retribution. Also, at NATS if
you see<BR>> Joe Blow's name by some really low scores you receive and you don't know <BR>> Joe<BR>> Blow human nature is to develop a bit of a grudge against Joe Blow. We <BR>> don't<BR>> need this kind of ill will in our community. I for one tried not to pay<BR>> attention to who was in the judges' chair at NATS because I didn't want to<BR>> subconsciously start associating my scores with individuals.<BR>><BR>> At the local contest most people know each other and feel more comfortable<BR>> discussing things so this is a different story. I initial my scores at <BR>> local<BR>> contests (when I remember). However, if a judge feels uncomfortable that <BR>> Joe<BR>> Bigshot may grill them if they give a low score I don't think the judge<BR>> should have to give his initials as long as a judge number is used.<BR>><BR>> Keith<BR>><BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <BR>> To: "NSRCA
Mailing List" <BR>> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 8:22 PM<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging<BR>><BR>><BR>>> Del,<BR>>> This is unfortunate and I've had a similar experience. Still, arranging<BR>> our<BR>>> rules to avoid behavior that we all know is inappropriate is a <BR>>> disservice.<BR>>> I would propose that anyone motivated to discuss CHANGING a score should<BR>> go<BR>>> through the CD. But there are other valid motivations:<BR>>> 1. To learn what downgrades, either specifically or in general terms, <BR>>> were<BR>>> applied<BR>>> 2. to understand a judges perspective and what they consider very<BR>> important<BR>>> (weight heavily)<BR>>> 3. others...<BR>>><BR>>> This is not to question a score but to both learn what the pilot can do <BR>>> to<BR>>> improve and (of equal importance) to learn how other judges approach
the<BR>>> evaluation. One thing I've noticed is that the "judgement" part of<BR>> judging<BR>>> can influence scores and these flying defects are often just as<BR>> controllable<BR>>> as the hard and fast rules. I recently was downgraded by a judge, whom I<BR>>> had a very friendly conversation with, because my center manuvers were <BR>>> not<BR>>> at the same altitude. Many may say that this should not have been<BR>>> downgraded, but this judges point was that the pilot that controls the<BR>>> altitude better should get the better score. Don't flame on this rules<BR>>> point! My point is that knowing that this is a perspective of some<BR>> judges,<BR>>> and it is a thing that I can work on without disadvantaging myself was<BR>> very<BR>>> valuable information.<BR>>><BR>>> We need to remember this is a fun hobby. If we are not disputing a <BR>>> score,<BR>>> we need to
approach judge feedback with modesty and a sense of humor. It<BR>> is<BR>>> a time of gathering information, not of making a counterpoint. Many <BR>>> times<BR>> a<BR>>> judge just can't remember, but I'm sure that they will remember more if<BR>> they<BR>>> know there will be no negative counterpoint. I would like to see judge<BR>>> initials on the bottom of the score sheets, given these guidelines.<BR>>><BR>>> --Lance<BR>>><BR>>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>>> From: "Del K. Rykert" <BR>>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <BR>>> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 1:31 PM<BR>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Defensive Judging<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> >I still remember the confrontation I experienced by the father of a <BR>>> >local<BR>>> > competitor taking me to task on a maneuver that I gigged harshly and <BR>>> > the<BR>>> > ensuing 30
minute debate with my finally pulling out my rule book and<BR>>> > showing him the paragraph and specific reasons his son received the<BR>>> > downgrades. Course he didn't agree the wings weren't level and the <BR>>> > model<BR>>> > had<BR>>> > noticeable climb when it should have been minor or no climb before <BR>>> > entry<BR>>> > to<BR>>> > spin. Wind was down the runway. Airplane fell out of spin in last 1/4 <BR>>> > of<BR>>> > spin into spiral.<BR>>> > Yes I could have reported this to the CD and made a bad situation<BR>>> > worse.<BR>>> > How does that encourage participation in the sport? It did ruin the<BR>> rest<BR>>> > of<BR>>> > my flights as a contestant and left me with taste of why do I want to<BR>>> > subject myself to this kind of abuse.<BR>>> > Some in the sport are wound to tightly and will use any
excuse to <BR>>> > try<BR>>> > to<BR>>> > increase their edge. Thankfully it is the smallest of minorities but <BR>>> > it<BR>>> > does still exist. For this reason I always have my rule book handy<BR>>> > whenever<BR>>> > I go to a contest and might be asked to judge. Shame the sport has been<BR>>> > reduced for some of us as defensive judging.<BR>>> ><BR>>> > Del<BR>>> > nsrca - 473<BR>>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>>> > From: "george w. kennie" <BR>>> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <BR>>> > Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 12:57 PM<BR>>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge transparency<BR>>> ><BR>>> ><BR>>> >> In spite of the fact that when I sit in the chair I ALWAYS initial the<BR>>> >> score<BR>>> >> sheet at district events, I can state from
experience that it's<BR>> probably<BR>>> >> not<BR>>> >> a good idea and I feel that the reason it's probably not done at the<BR>> Nats<BR>>> >> is<BR>>> >> due to a "been there, done that" previous learning experience.<BR>>> >> There is just too much competitive passion on the part of individual<BR>>> >> pilots<BR>>> >> to avoid personal conflicts escalating into personality wars with long<BR>>> >> lasting repercussions.<BR>>> >> Think about it,.........how many times have you heard it expressed <BR>>> >> that<BR>> a<BR>>> >> particular judge has a reputation as a tough or BAD judge?<BR>>> >> Too much knowledge can generate factional devisiveness which is<BR>> probably<BR>>> >> best avoided.<BR>>> >> G.<BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>>
>><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>>> >> From: "Anthony Romano" <BR>>> >> To: <BR>>> >> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 9:07 AM<BR>>> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge <BR>>> >> transparency<BR>>> >><BR>>> >><BR>>> >>> Hi Jim,<BR>>> >>> Good points. There is an easy way to start this. Every time you judge<BR>>> >>> legibly sign or initial your score sheets.<BR>>> >>> To the conspirists, remember when questioning judges a little respect<BR>>> >>> and<BR>>> >>> courtesy goes a long way.<BR>>> >>><BR>>> >>> Anthony<BR>>>
>>><BR>>> >>>>From: "Jim Woodward" <BR>>> >>>>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <BR>>> >>>>To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <BR>>> >>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge<BR>> transparency<BR>>> >>>>Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 08:09:31 -0500<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>I think posting judges names along with the scores is more than a <BR>>> >>>>fair<BR>>> >>>>idea<BR>>> >>>>and goes a long way toward increasing the transparency at a contest.<BR>>> >>>>When<BR>>> >>>>you increase the transparency, the "pilots" have a better<BR>> understanding<BR>>> >>>>and<BR>>> >>>>good time. When the pilots are happy, they come back to the contests<BR>>> >>>>and<BR>>> >>>>maybe bring someone
with them. If you notice, after a contest when<BR>> our<BR>>> >>>>friend who did not makes it calls and asks, ". how was the contest,"<BR>> the<BR>>> >>>>next question is ". how was the judging." Judging, or problems with<BR>>> >>>>judging, is such an intrinsic part of the pattern experience that you<BR>>> >>>>can't<BR>>> >>>>separate it from the "description" of how the contest went.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>1. What is interesting is that the "flight" takes place in a public<BR>>> >>>>forum - anyone can see it. As we watch it, more often or not it is<BR>>> >>>>watched<BR>>> >>>>in small groups which include fellow class-competitors, or more<BR>>> >>>>experienced<BR>>> >>>>pilots pointing out to
younger pilots errors to look out for.<BR>>> >>>>2. The judges for the round are public information. IE - you can <BR>>> >>>>look<BR>>> >>>>out on the flight line and see who is judging<BR>>> >>>>3. The pilot for the round is public information. IE - you can look<BR>>> >>>>out on the flight line and see who is flying.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Yet, "who" and "how" the scores were given remains a small mystery. <BR>>> >>>>A<BR>>> >>>>lot<BR>>> >>>>of folks do not want to be known as the guy who goes to the CD and<BR>> asks<BR>>> >>>>questions about the scoring and such. Or, is seen by their fellow<BR>>> >>>>competitors as being the CD hound.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>>
>>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Judge Training: Most judge training takes place in practice and at<BR>>> >>>>contests. There is no better forum for judge training than the<BR>> contest<BR>>> >>>>environment. When the tear sheets are posted for each round with<BR>> judge<BR>>> >>>>identification, you can go and ask ". I watched that and wondered why<BR>>> >>>>you<BR>>> >>>>gave it xyz score." This is an incredibly valuable moment when all <BR>>> >>>>of<BR>>> >>>>us<BR>>> >>>>are gathered we do more to get the most out of it. As it stands,<BR>> after<BR>>> >>>>the<BR>>> >>>>round is posted the next comment is, ". well, I guess the judges<BR>> didn't<BR>>> >>>>catch that zero.. (and similar comments)." These conversations
are<BR>>> >>>>already<BR>>> >>>>taking place at the contest. Posting the tear sheets for everyone<BR>> would<BR>>> >>>>bring these conversations into the open as a positive element of the<BR>>> >>>>experience, and not add to the conspiracy theorists ammunition (every<BR>>> >>>>district has a prime person/competitor who is a judging conspiracy<BR>>> >>>>theorists).<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Last thing, there are two judges for every 1 pilot, thus, there is<BR>> 100%<BR>>> >>>>more<BR>>> >>>>judging work taking place than piloting work. We are there to fly,<BR>> but<BR>>> >>>>the<BR>>> >>>>performance of the judges is every bit on display as the performance<BR>> of<BR>>>
>>>>the<BR>>> >>>>pilot. In the US we also tally the judges performance and keep track<BR>> of<BR>>> >>>>them on the national scene. Posting the tear sheets with judges <BR>>> >>>>names<BR>>> >>>>would<BR>>> >>>>help this effort, allow for a GREAT training tool to be available to<BR>> the<BR>>> >>>>CD<BR>>> >>>>and fellow pilots, and become a "self-correcting-tool" to those<BR>> persons<BR>>> >>>>who<BR>>> >>>>to judge with bias (intentionally or not). As a judge, at the end of<BR>>> >>>>the<BR>>> >>>>round it would be great to know how my scores compared to the other<BR>>> >>>>judge.<BR>>> >>>>Each judge could discuss the round. When the tear sheets are posted<BR>> in<BR>>> >>>>the<BR>>>
>>>>open, it will "promote" this conversation and I believe, help on many<BR>>> >>>>levels. Also, if you as a judge know the scores and names will be<BR>>> >>>>posted<BR>>> >>>>after a round, I bet a lot of judge-lazy behavior will go away, like<BR>>> >>>>when<BR>>> >>>>they/we have our head down and write scores, thus missing 30% or more<BR>> of<BR>>> >>>>maneuvers.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Just some ideas.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Jim W.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>> _____<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>>
>>>>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Wayne<BR>>> >>>>Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 11:37 PM<BR>>> >>>>To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>>> >>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge<BR>> transparency<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Fred,<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>my point is post them...not leave loose tear sheets on a table for<BR>>> >>>>pilots<BR>>> >>>>to<BR>>> >>>>take away from the table. This has been the practice at the NATS. <BR>>> >>>>They<BR>>> >>>>need<BR>>> >>>>to be posted in some way. Not just tossed as loose sheets for the <BR>>> >>>>wind<BR>>>
>>>>and<BR>>> >>>>pilots to remove from the public view<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>That is all my point was. I had a conversation with an FAI pilot back<BR>>> >>>>after<BR>>> >>>>the NATS and he has been advocating this the past 3 years yet still<BR>> not<BR>>> >>>>happening.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>----- Original Message -----<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>From: Fred Huber <BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>To: NSRCA Mailing List <BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:13 PM<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge<BR>> transparency<BR>>> >>>><BR>>>
>>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>To me, "public" can be debated somewhat....<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Its probably adequate to post them on a table where anyone WHO WANTS<BR>> TO<BR>>> >>>>can<BR>>> >>>>see them.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>All the Pattern contests I have been to, the scores have been taped <BR>>> >>>>to<BR>> a<BR>>> >>>>table where anyone who wanted to look had access. Good enough. <BR>>> >>>>Don't<BR>>> >>>>make<BR>>> >>>>it harder than it has to be.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>----- Original Message -----<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>From: Wayne
<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>To: NSRCA Mailing List <BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:21 PM<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge<BR>> transparency<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Public is not left on a table....Public is posted for the world to<BR>> see.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>check out the awesome job done by the Swiss at the last Euro Champs.<BR>> Too<BR>>> >>>>bad<BR>>> >>>>we in the USA with more pattern flyers than anywhere else can't get<BR>> with<BR>>> >>>>the<BR>>> >>>>program.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>>
>>>><BR>>> >>>>http://www.em06.ch/ranking_preliminary.asp<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Wayne<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>----- Original Message -----<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>From: Lance Van Nostrand<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>To: NSRCA Mailing List <BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 6:17 PM<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI sporting code on judge transparency<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>To all rule-meisters,<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>>
>>>>I know there are some on this list that have deep insight into the<BR>>> >>>>intent<BR>>> >>>>and history of the F3A sporting code. I hope to either get a solid<BR>>> >>>>answer<BR>>> >>>>or pointed in the right direction. This is not an idle request.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>Part 5.1.8 Marking - last sentence<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>The scores given by each judge for each competitor shall be made<BR>> public<BR>>> >>>>at<BR>>> >>>>the end of each round of competition.<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>What level of transparency is mandated? Is it enough to report the<BR>>> >>>>scores<BR>>> >>>>from judge 1-4 or is it expected that the identity of the judge be<BR>>
known<BR>>> >>>>as<BR>>> >>>>well?<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>--Lance<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>> _____<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>_______________________________________________<BR>>> >>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>> >>>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>> >>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>> _____<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>_______________________________________________<BR>>> >>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>> >>>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>>
>>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>> _____<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>>> >>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>>> >>>>Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.7/537 - Release Date:<BR>>> >>>>11/17/2006<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>> _____<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>>>_______________________________________________<BR>>> >>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>> >>>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>> >>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>> >>>><BR>>> >>><BR>>>
>>><BR>>> >>>>_______________________________________________<BR>>> >>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>> >>>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>> >>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>> >>><BR>>> >>> _________________________________________________________________<BR>>> >>> Get free, personalized commercial-free online radio with MSN Radio<BR>>> >>> powered<BR>>> >>> by Pandora http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001<BR>>> >>><BR>>> >>> _______________________________________________<BR>>> >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>> >>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>> >>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>> >>><BR>>> >><BR>>> >>
_______________________________________________<BR>>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>> >> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>> >><BR>>> ><BR>>> > _______________________________________________<BR>>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>> > NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>><BR>>> _______________________________________________<BR>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>><BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<P><FONT color=#666666><FONT size=2>
<HR SIZE=1>
Sponsored Link</FONT></FONT><BR><BR><A href="http://forms.nextag.com/goto.jsp?url=/serv/main/buyer/education.jsp?doSearch=n&tm=y&search=deg_quit_job&s=4016&p=5036" target=_blank rel=nofollow>Want a degree but can't afford to quit? Online degrees from top schools - in as fast as 1 year</A>
<DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR><A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A></DIV></DIV><BR></DIV></div><br>
<font color="666666"><font size="2"><hr size=1>Sponsored Link</font></font><br><br>
<a href="https://www2.nextag.com/goto.jsp?product=100000035&url=%2fst.jsp&tm=y&search=b_historiclows170k&s=3968&p=5035&disc=y&vers=687">Mortgage rates near historic lows: $150,000 loan as low as $579/mo. Intro-*Terms</a></body></html>