<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<STYLE>P {
PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3086" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Sounds like a good deal but I need metric lengths: 68.5mm.
I'll pay extra for that! <LOL></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>John Pavlick<BR><A
href="http://www.idseng.com">http://www.idseng.com</A></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=rickwallace45@hotmail.com
href="mailto:rickwallace45@hotmail.com">Rick Wallace</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, July 03, 2007 2:03
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] 6-32 control
horns WAS Chapter-12 computerscience.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>John - <BR>6-32 all-thread from the hardware store's been
working fine... if you want I can cut some 2.63452" lengths and package them
in a 'Pattern' container - for you, only $16.50 per pair ! <BR> <BR>let
me know - <BR>Rick <BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
<HR id=stopSpelling>
<BR>> From: <A
href="mailto:jpavlick@idseng.com">jpavlick@idseng.com</A><BR>> To: <A
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A><BR>>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 00:40:20 -0400<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Chapter-12 computer science.<BR>> <BR>> Hey, this is fun! i guess i did
a good job with that one. The next time the <BR>> list is slow, I'll know
what to do!<BR>> <BR>> Hey - real question: What is everyone using for
6-32 threaded control horn <BR>> setups? I heard that stainless screws are
too brittle. Can I just use <BR>> zinc-plated hardware from Home Depot or
will that only work on a "sport" <BR>> model? <LOL><BR>> <BR>>
John Pavlick<BR>> http://www.idseng.com<BR>> <BR>> John
Pavlick<BR>> http://www.idseng.com<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> ----- Original
Message ----- <BR>> From: "Keith Black"
<tkeithblack@gmail.com><BR>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007
12:32 AM<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-12 computer
science.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> > Matthew,<BR>> ><BR>> >
syntax error: you didn't define cnt.<BR>> ><BR>> > And by the way,
though in principal I agree with you about the int<BR>> > declaration
(depending on John's intent) in C or C++ it's perfectly<BR>> >
acceptable to increment (++) a char.<BR>> ><BR>> > Keith<BR>>
><BR>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> > From: "Matthew
Frederick" <mjfrederick@cox.net><BR>> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> > Sent: Monday, July 02,
2007 10:34 PM<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-12 computer
science.<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> >> John,<BR>> >>
What language is that for? C/C++? I don't think that function would
work<BR>> >> because doing math with a data type char provides
unpredictable results.<BR>> > It<BR>> >> looks like a function
that would return the number 255 to the function<BR>> > that<BR>>
>> called it, but I would have written it like this:<BR>> >>
int foo(void){<BR>> >> int num;<BR>> >> for(num = 0; cnt
< 255; num++){<BR>> >> }<BR>> >> return num;<BR>>
>> }<BR>> >><BR>> >> Or better yet:<BR>> >>
int foo(void){<BR>> >> return 255;<BR>> >> }<BR>>
>><BR>> >> Or even better yet, if you know the number that will
always be returned,<BR>> >> just make it a global constant and be
done with it... Also I've never<BR>> >> intialized 2 variables in a
FOR statement before. Didn't know it was<BR>> >> possible, and not
quite sure I would ever need to. If the language shown<BR>> >
was<BR>> >> not C/C++, then maybe in that language you can in fact do
math with data<BR>> >> type char, but why would you store numbers as
text? It takes far more<BR>> > space<BR>> >> to store them.
Keep in mind, I haven't done actual programming in a <BR>> >>
couple<BR>> >> of years so I am a little rusty (I don't consider
working with access<BR>> >> databases and excel to be programming
although some knowledge is <BR>> >> helpful).<BR>>
>><BR>> >> Matt<BR>> >><BR>> >> -----
Original Message ----- <BR>> >> From: "John Pavlick"
<jpavlick@idseng.com><BR>> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >> Sent: Monday, July
02, 2007 9:16 PM<BR>> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-12
computer science.<BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >> > OK,
what does this do?<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > char
foo(void)<BR>> >> > {<BR>> >> > char cnt, num;<BR>>
>> ><BR>> >> > for(cnt = 0, num = 0; cnt < 256;
cnt++)<BR>> >> > {<BR>> >> > num++;<BR>> >>
> }<BR>> >> > return num;<BR>> >> > }<BR>>
>> ><BR>> >> > John Pavlick<BR>> >> >
http://www.idseng.com<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> ><BR>>
>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> > From:
"Matthew Frederick" <mjfrederick@cox.net><BR>> >> > To:
"NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>
> Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 4:22 AM<BR>> >> > Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.<BR>> >> ><BR>>
>> ><BR>> >> >> I'd like to see the code myself...
I've got quite a bit of Computer<BR>> >> >> Science<BR>>
>> >> training.<BR>> >> >> ----- Original Message
----- <BR>> >> >> From: "Fred Huber"
<fhhuber@clearwire.net><BR>> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing
List" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >> >> Sent:
Tuesday, June 26, 2007 3:23 PM<BR>> >> >> Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.<BR>> >> >><BR>>
>> >><BR>> >> >>> What computer language was the
program written in?<BR>> >> >>><BR>> >>
>>> Send me the source code.<BR>> >> >>><BR>>
>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >>
>>> From: "W. Hinkle" <whinkle1024@msn.com><BR>> >>
>>> To: <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 10:25 AM<BR>> >>
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.<BR>>
>> >>><BR>> >> >>><BR>> >>
>>>> Dave is a good pilot but character being beyond reproach is a
bit of<BR>> > a<BR>> >> >>>> stretch. Ask John
Glizellis about when Dave shot him down and <BR>> >> >>>>
haggled<BR>> >> >>>> over<BR>> >>
>>>> the price. This was to replace a brand new model with less
than 30<BR>> >> >>>> flights<BR>> >>
>>>> on it at the NATS. The incident was at the NATS during
practice at<BR>> > the<BR>> >> >>>> AMA<BR>>
>> >>>> field. We all make mistakes, but to penny pinch the
guy that just<BR>> > cost<BR>> >> >>>> his<BR>>
>> >>>> new model part way through the Nationals. JR had to
step in and<BR>> > forced<BR>> >> >>>> the<BR>>
>> >>>> hand. If it had not been for Dave the sponsorship
threat Dave would<BR>> >> >>>> still<BR>> >>
>>>> be<BR>> >> >>>> argueing the price of a
new built model. Dave replaced it after some<BR>> >> >>>>
debate<BR>> >> >>>> with JR. This is not character beyond
reproach? Dave may be a good<BR>> > guy<BR>> >>
>>>> just<BR>> >> >>>> don't be on the same
freq. He'll tell how poor your model is built<BR>> > and<BR>>
>> >>>> its<BR>> >> >>>> not worth the
price of a professional built kit.<BR>> >> >>>><BR>>
>> >>>> I'll agree that both parties in this fight are not
angels. I'm not a<BR>> >> >>>> fan<BR>> >>
>>>> or<BR>> >> >>>> Eric's but my question
to this forum<BR>> >> >>>><BR>> >>
>>>> Why is the NSRCA involved at all?<BR>> >>
>>>><BR>> >> >>>> Doesn't the NSRCA have
better things to do with its time and energy<BR>> >> >>>>
than<BR>> >> >>>> lynching a judge at the request of a
couple pilots that have<BR>> > character<BR>> >>
>>>> beyond reproach?<BR>> >> >>>><BR>>
>> >>>> I feel this is another sign of the NSRCA just
wasting resources, <BR>> >> >>>> time<BR>> >>
>>>> and<BR>> >> >>>> money in the name of
being the Savior of pattern flying. Beware<BR>> > people<BR>>
>> >>>> beware. Come on. Getting two of Dave's best buddies
in D1 to write a<BR>> >> >>>> program<BR>> >>
>>>> to damn a person that they and David hate with a passion. To
me is<BR>> >> >>>> smells<BR>> >>
>>>> like old shellfish. These were the same judges who claimed in
the<BR>> > past<BR>> >> >>>> the<BR>> >>
>>>> judge that gave the zero was the one that got it
right.<BR>> >> >>>><BR>> >> >>>> The
NSRCA has no business in this arena. I find it appalling the<BR>> >
Board<BR>> >> >>>> even<BR>> >> >>>>
had this on the agenda. I also find it appalling that a ruling was<BR>>
>> >>>> made,<BR>> >> >>>> then Eric
was notified of the charges and the conviction. As Eric<BR>> >>
>>>> stated,<BR>> >> >>>> no<BR>> >>
>>>> statistics can determine what the judge actually saw or
better yet<BR>> > what<BR>> >> >>>> the<BR>>
>> >>>> pilot actually flew. So Eric's scores were below the
average for a<BR>> >> >>>> given<BR>> >>
>>>> pilot. Maybe the pilot flew below average in Eric's eyes.
This is <BR>> >> >>>> why<BR>> >>
>>>> the<BR>> >> >>>> NATS uses more than one
judge. This is a fact of life. This looks<BR>> > very<BR>> >>
>>>> one<BR>> >> >>>> sided by the
NSRCA.<BR>> >> >>>><BR>> >> >>>> The
NSRCA has no place in this squabble.<BR>> >> >>>><BR>>
>> >>>><BR>> >> >>>>>From: "John
Pavlick" <jpavlick@idseng.com><BR>> >>
>>>>>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List
<nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>
>>>>>To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>
>>>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too
far.<BR>> >> >>>>>Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:27:00
-0400<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>>Len,<BR>> >> >>>>> All of the
people involved were from D1 - I thought the good ol'<BR>> >
boys<BR>> >> >>>>>were in D2 and D3!
<LOL><BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>>John Pavlick<BR>> >>
>>>>>http://www.idseng.com<BR>> >>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> >>
>>>>> From: Leonard Rudy<BR>> >> >>>>>
To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> >> >>>>> Sent: Monday,
June 25, 2007 8:47 PM<BR>> >> >>>>> Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.<BR>> >>
>>>>><BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>> John,<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>>
>> >>>>> The conflict may have blossomed like a Hockey
Game Conflict,<BR>> >> >>>>> but<BR>> >>
>>>>> in<BR>> >> >>>>>the NHL<BR>>
>> >>>>> those "with the power" hear both sides and let
each side present<BR>> >> >>>>> their<BR>> >>
>>>>>case before<BR>> >> >>>>> the
powers to be assign penalties. After the penalties are<BR>> >
imposed,<BR>> >> >>>>> the<BR>> >>
>>>>>player or<BR>> >> >>>>> individual
still has the right to appeal the decision.<BR>> >>
>>>>> You say Eric should take whatever the powers to be want
and<BR>> >> >>>>> don't<BR>> >>
>>>>>make any<BR>> >> >>>>> noise or
waves.<BR>> >> >>>>> This is a clear message to others
who will be judging at<BR>> > meets<BR>> >>
>>>>> in<BR>> >> >>>>>the future. DO
NOT GIVE THE GOOD OLD BOYS GROUP any low or bad<BR>> > scores<BR>>
>> >>>>>or<BR>> >> >>>>>you may
be on the receiving end of some form of penalty that you <BR>> >>
>>>>>will<BR>> >> >>>>>not<BR>>
>> >>>>>like.<BR>> >>
>>>>><BR>> >> >>>>> Len Rudy<BR>>
>> >>>>> "Life is easier if you learn to plow around the
stumps" or in<BR>> >> >>>>> other<BR>> >>
>>>>>words, do not<BR>> >> >>>>> hand
out low scores to the Good Old Boys or you will pay dearly<BR>> >
for<BR>> >> >>>>> it<BR>> >>
>>>>>one way or<BR>> >> >>>>>
another.<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>> Fred Huber <fhhuber@clearwire.net> wrote:<BR>>
>> >>>>> The penalty does not appear
appropriate...<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>> It also sounds like it was not applied in a manner
consistant<BR>> > with<BR>> >> >>>>> the<BR>>
>> >>>>>rules system.<BR>> >>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> >>
>>>>> From: John Ferrell<BR>> >> >>>>>
To: Don Ramsey ; NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> >> >>>>>
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 8:12 AM<BR>> >> >>>>>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.<BR>> >>
>>>>><BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>> I have the good fortune to not be involved in this
dispute. I<BR>> > am<BR>> >> >>>>>only aware of
the conflict.<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>> Not being very good at staying out of arguments, I offer
the<BR>> >> >>>>>following observations:<BR>>
>> >>>>> A heated difference of opinions
occurred.<BR>> >> >>>>> Every one involved is
considered a valuable asset to the<BR>> > Pattern<BR>> >>
>>>>>Game.<BR>> >> >>>>> Things were
said that should not have been said.<BR>> >> >>>>>
Every one thinks they are right.<BR>> >> >>>>> There
was probably at least one (or may be several) bad<BR>> > call(s)<BR>>
>> >>>>> by<BR>> >> >>>>>some
one.<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>> The conflict blossomed like a Hockey Game Conflict and
the <BR>> >> >>>>> net<BR>> >>
>>>>>result was those with the power and responsibility treated
it like a<BR>> >> >>>>>Hockey<BR>> >>
>>>>>Game Conflict! A serious "time out" was assigned to the
individual <BR>> >> >>>>>at<BR>> >>
>>>>>the<BR>> >> >>>>>focal point of
the conflict. It was their duty to put the problem on<BR>> >>
>>>>>ice.<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>>
>> >>>>> The expectations of the rest of us who value the
game and its<BR>> >> >>>>>players is that right or
wrong the referee's call must be honored.<BR>> > The<BR>> >>
>>>>>referee has the power to impose further penalties if the
individual<BR>> >> >>>>>continues to make waves. Right
or wrong, this is the was disputes <BR>> >>
>>>>>are<BR>> >> >>>>>handled in the
world of competition.<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>> If the individual was drawn into the conflict by goading
it <BR>> >> >>>>> is<BR>> >>
>>>>> still<BR>> >> >>>>>he who gets
the penalty.<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>> Conflict resolution is not something that is natural to
the<BR>> >> >>>>> human<BR>> >>
>>>>>condition. Conflict is.<BR>> >>
>>>>><BR>> >> >>>>> Eric needs to take
the penalty and get on with things.Those <BR>> >>
>>>>> in<BR>> >> >>>>> power<BR>>
>> >>>>>need to accept that the penalty has been applied
and to continue the<BR>> >> >>>>>game.<BR>>
>> >>>>><BR>> >> >>>>> WE ALL
need to be aware that we either play nice or get sent<BR>> > to<BR>>
>> >>>>> the<BR>> >>
>>>>>showers!<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>>
>> >>>>> Another factor to consider is that the higher
profile one<BR>> >> >>>>> achieves<BR>> >>
>>>>>in this sport the greater the need to hold that individual
to higher<BR>> >> >>>>>standards.<BR>> >>
>>>>> Eric is certainly a "high profile" player.<BR>>
>> >>>>><BR>> >> >>>>> John
Ferrell W8CCW<BR>> >> >>>>> "Life is easier if you
learn to plow<BR>> >> >>>>> around the stumps"<BR>>
>> >>>>> http://DixieNC.US<BR>> >>
>>>>><BR>> >> >>>>> ----- Original
Message -----<BR>> >> >>>>> From: Don Ramsey<BR>>
>> >>>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> >>
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2007 7:32 PM<BR>> >>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too
far.<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>><BR>> >> >>>>> I would like to
thank Eric for the nice complement in his<BR>> >>
>>>>> comment,<BR>> >> >>>>>"To
circumvent this conflict of interest problem and to keep the<BR>> >>
>>>>>Nationals<BR>> >> >>>>>above
reproach, I steeped out of line and asked Don Ramsey to<BR>> >>
>>>>>independently<BR>> >> >>>>>choose
the judges, Dave could not refuse this method, but I will <BR>> >>
>>>>>tell<BR>> >> >>>>>you<BR>>
>> >>>>>that he got extremely mad at me for doing
it."<BR>> >> >>>>><BR>> >>
>>>>> I must respond that for good or bad I've been choosing
the<BR>> >> >>>>> finals<BR>> >>
>>>>>judges for many years. I started that process when Jeff
Hill was<BR>> > Event<BR>> >> >>>>>Director. It
must also be stated that I've never had any pressure <BR>> >>
>>>>>of<BR>> >> >>>>>any<BR>>
>> >>>>>kind from contest management regarding who I
choose to judge. I try<BR>> > to<BR>> >>
>>>>>pick the best candidates and rotate those so no single
judge can<BR>> >> >>>>>influence<BR>> >>
>>>>>the outcome extradionarly.<BR>> >>
>>>>><BR>> >> >>>>> Don<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>> >>
>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>> >>
>>>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>> >>
>>>>> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/863 - Release
<BR>> >> >>>>> Date:<BR>> >>
>>>>>6/23/2007 11:08 AM<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>>
> -------<BR>> >> >>>>> Building a website is a
piece of cake.<BR>> >> >>>>> Yahoo! Small Business
gives you all the tools to get online.<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>>
>> >>>>>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>> >> >>>> -- <BR>> >>
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>> >>
>>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>> >>
>>>> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.9/872 - Release
Date:<BR>> >> >>>> 6/26/2007<BR>> >>
>>>> 6:43 PM<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>> >> >>
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>> <BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> NSRCA-discussion
mailing list<BR>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>