<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Comic Sans MS";
panose-1:3 15 7 2 3 3 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>With respect to the following statement –<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>“</span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>The NSRCA BoD encourages your support in responding to the survey as the changes are believed to be appropriate for the continued growth and sustainment of AMA pattern.”</span></b><span style='color:#3333FF'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Specifically, “the changes are believed to be appropriate for the continued growth and sustainment of AMA pattern.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>The verbiage is very clearly in favor of the proposals, and comes from the Rules Proposal Committee. Given various Boards, Officers, Committees, etc are viewed authorities, the support for the proposals from the Board could very easily impart a bias on a survey respondent. This is an important aspect as to the validity of the survey outcome. Whether each Committee member supports the proposals, that is another issue, but, it would seem reasonable to presume that the majority of the Committee Members support the proposals or the proposals would not have made it out of Committee.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>At this point the best “fix”, IMHO, would be to reintroduce the proposals without the questioned verbiage and reset the survey such that any completed respondents are voided and must complete the survey again. I have no idea if this is possible, and it certainly does not remove the impression that the Committee is in favor of the proposals.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>My interest in making this post is in adding some clarity to the issue at hand, and offer a possible solution / improvement. Having served various positions in the NSRCA, it is often a thankless job, so it is not my intent to attack anyone involved in the process of trying to improve pattern.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br>Dave Lockhart<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Peter Vogel<br><b>Sent:</b> Saturday, February 11, 2012 6:42 PM<br><b>To:</b> General pattern discussion<br><b>Cc:</b> General pattern discussion<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is available<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>I don't think we're supposed to believe anything about the board's opinion, they are asking for ours. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Peter+<br><br>Sent from my iPhone4S<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>On Feb 11, 2012, at 3:13 PM, Dan Curtis <<a href="mailto:warrior523@att.net">warrior523@att.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>It is important, due to the way the survey was presented. The language in the explanation states that the board is for the proposals. It does not limit their support to the fact that the committee is doing things. This tends to place a lot more legitimacy to these proposals than actually exsist. Without seeing the views of our board we are expected to accept as fact that the board approves of these proposals. I would strongly doubt that is the case. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Dan<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><hr size=1 width="100%" align=center></span></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Peter Vogel <<a href="mailto:vogel.peter@gmail.com">vogel.peter@gmail.com</a>><br><b>To:</b> General pattern discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>><br><b>Cc:</b> General pattern discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>><br><b>Sent:</b> Sat, February 11, 2012 4:58:44 PM<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is available</span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>I fail to see why the board's opinion on the rules proposals as written is relevant. They are doing what I would expect the board of an org like outs to do: asking the membership for their opinions on the proposals. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The only thing I would have liked to see was a fourth option on the survey questions: ' I would support this proposal with modifications: ' with a text field for verbatim feedback on the modifications. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Peter+<br><br>Sent from my iPhone4S<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>On Feb 11, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Dan Curtis <<a href="mailto:warrior523@att.net" target="_blank">warrior523@att.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>That is not what is written in the introduction. I would like to see each board member answer the question on this membership list, are they for it as it is stated or are they for the process in general?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Dan<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><hr size=1 width="100%" align=center></span></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Scott McHarg <<a href="mailto:scmcharg@gmail.com" target="_blank">scmcharg@gmail.com</a>><br><b>To:</b> General pattern discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>><br><b>Sent:</b> Sat, February 11, 2012 2:49:29 PM<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is available<br></span><br>Dan,<br> I guess you'd have to ask each individual member of the BoD. I can tell you that prior to finalizing what you see as a candidate proposal, we presented where we were and what we were working on to the BoD in a telephonic meeting. Although they did not have the proposals in their hand, each proposal was explained and the floor was open for discussion. Not one single person said something to the contrary other than they felt we were doing a good job and we were on the right track. That says to me that we were pursuing what was asked of us. The survey will then tell us if our community feels the same.<br><br>Scott<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Dan Curtis <<a href="mailto:warrior523@att.net" target="_blank">warrior523@att.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>As I asked in the previous post, does the current board feel that these proposals are valid and good for the pattern community. This is what is states in the survey introduction and is this a fact?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The survey could have also had a question asking if the membership or the community feels that any changes are needed at this point and time.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>This survey, with its introduction statement, seems to show a bit of predispostion. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Dan<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><hr size=1 width="100%" align=center></span></div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Scott McHarg <<a href="mailto:scmcharg@gmail.com" target="_blank">scmcharg@gmail.com</a>><br><b>To:</b> General pattern discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>Sent:</span></b><span style='font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Sat, February 11, 2012 2:29:53 PM <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is available<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>Gentlemen,<br> As you can see from the forums, everyone of us has our own opinion. The BoD asked us to make "proposals". These are not "the rules" nor are they set in stone. We came up with said proposals based on input from individuals who took the time to email, phone and post their requests. The survey is doing exactly what it was meant to do, get everyone's opinion based on what we laid out there. If you don't like it, that's fine. This is simply a starting point. The results of the survey will tell us whether we are on, off or close to what our community wants. Once the survey finishes, the results will be taken back and, if needed, proposals amended. I'd suggest that the results will indicate what percentile are in favor of vs. those that are against. I don't think any of you would expect everyone that flies pattern to get in a room and try to formulate proposals based on every single opinion in that room. That would be a nightmare.<br> The Board of Directors recognize that change is a <u>possibility</u> but not necessarily warranted in all cases. Again, that would be the purpose of the focus group to try to get something done and out there for the community to weigh in on. At that point, the amended proposals are then taken to the BoD for endorsement and then to the AMA Rules Committee which, in reality, is the group that must find out if these proposals are realistic and what the community wants. AMA owns precision aerobatics, not the NSRCA and the NSRCA does not make the rules. The 5500g rule came from other development classes that are around the world i.e. France and South Africa who have implemented said changes to their development classes. MAYBE the number is off to an extent. MAYBE we don't need that kind of increase. I guess that's what the survey will tell us. I'd suggest telling all that you know to get out there and take the survey if you feel strongly about something. This is how we begin the process.<br><br>Scott<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Vicente "Vince" Bortone <<a href="mailto:vicenterc@comcast.net" target="_blank">vicenterc@comcast.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>So is this a second survey? I remember one few months ago and didn't have those proposals. I am confused now.<br><span style='color:#888888'><br>Vicente "Vince" Bortone</span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>----- Original Message -----<br>From: Dan Curtis &<a href="mailto:lt%3Bwarrior523@att.net" target="_blank">lt;warrior523@att.net</a>&gt;<br>To: General pattern discussion &<a href="mailto:lt%3Bnsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">lt;nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>&gt;<br>Sent: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:17:53 -0000 (UTC)<br>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is available<br>I was re-reading the post about the survey and am really having a problem with<br>the 4th paragraph. It says:<br>The NSRCA BoD encourages your support in responding to the survey as the changes<br>are believed to be appropriate for the continued growth and sustainment of AMA<br>pattern. <br> <br>Is this actually saying that our board of directors is for the changes stated in<br>the survey. This is really hard to believe and even harder to fathom.<br> <br>Where did these "candidate rule proposals" come from? Why the 5500 gram weight<br>rule? Where did that one come from? This whole thing seems strange and my<br>goodness how many times have some of these isssues been hashed before?<br> <br>Dan Curtis<br>________________________________<br>From: Scott McHarg <<a href="mailto:scmcharg@gmail.com" target="_blank">scmcharg@gmail.com</a>><br>To: General pattern discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>><br>Sent: Fri, February 10, 2012 12:24:44 PM<br>Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is available<br>The NSRCA Board of Directors (BoD), in consideration of NSRCA bylaws indicating<br>that the NSRCA should take responsibility for making a consensus statement to<br>the AMA Rules Committee on rules pertaining to Radio Control Aerobatics, has<br>convened a Rules Proposal Committee. The purpose of this committee is to<br>prepare candidate rule proposals for endorsement by the NSRCA BoD. The<br>committee is chaired by Scott McHarg and its members include Jon Carter, John<br>Gayer, Michael McEvilley, and Rick Sweeney.<br> <br>The NSRCA BoD requested the rules committee to craft proposals with a focus on<br>safety and contestant participation concerns. The rules committee was further<br>requested to craft proposals in consideration of the varying and oftentimes<br>conflicting opinions of the individuals that comprise the AMA pattern community,<br>while recognizing that change is warranted. In response to NSRCA BoD direction,<br>the rules committee has developed four (4) candidate proposals for endorsement<br>by the NSRCA BoD.<br> <br>In the spirit reflected by the direction of the NSRCA BoD, this survey is<br>offered to provide the AMA pattern community the opportunity to review,<br>consider, and provide feedback by supporting or not supporting each of the<br>candidate proposals to the NSRCA BoD. This survey is not a vote; it is only a<br>means for the NSRCA BoD to gather information to be used in making their final<br>determination of those proposals to be endorsed by the NSRCA.<br> <br>The NSRCA BoD encourages your support in responding to the survey as the changes<br>are believed to be appropriate for the continued growth and sustainment of AMA<br>pattern. <br> <br>Finally, it should be understood that individual AMA members are free to submit<br>commentary on these proposals to the AMA Contest Board, and are also able to<br>submit individual proposals on the same topics as those endorsed by the NSRCA<br>BoD.<br> This survey will be available until midnight March 1, 2012 and may be taken<br>only once. The survey is available at <a href="http://www.nsrca.us/" target="_blank">www.nsrca.us</a> and you must be registered<br>with the website and logged in but being a current member is NOT required. <br>Thank you for your understanding and participation in this rules proposal<br>survey.<br>--<br>Scott A. McHarg<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br><br clear=all><br>-- <br><b><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:#3333FF'>Scott A. McHarg</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><br>_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br><br clear=all><br>-- <br><b><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:#3333FF'>Scott A. McHarg</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div></body></html>