<html><head></head><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>John</div><div><br></div><div>Very true your statement .. The weight proposal that passed before did not come through the NSRCA board . I found out by reading RCU. And having been a board member during that time would not have backed ,supported or campaigned against it as a member of the board . The new proposal Joe pr anyone else put out is not at issue as a matter of fact I have no issue with any proposal any member submits as a member. Even though I disagree with just about all of them and do not support them. For Reasons I have already stated on several occasions.</div><div><br></div><div>What I take issue with is the boards backing of the proposals as an organization . When the survey that was taken only had 105 or so respondents and roughly of those respondents it was nearly split even or close to it. So we have 400+ members 100 or so took the survey and it was split 50/50 or dang close to it. 1/4 of the membership voted the split was 50/50 that means 12% of the NSRCA or so are in favor . Yet the board passes a proclamation to throw its weight behind the proposals as if the entirety of NSRCA membership is behind said proposals. Two of the board members are posting here and there waving the flag for the submitted proposals that the board has backed with statements about cost savings etc.etc. Statements such as yours about attendance a the NATS tied to weight and another statement by another board member about weight and resale value of his used aircraft. What am I supposed to gleam from that. </div><div>All said .... My problem is the board has over stepped its self and is not representative of its members in there entirety . It has an aroma of self interest and personal agenda wether true or just perceived .</div><div><br></div><div>Until the board pulls their proclamation of support or shows me that the membership in a clear and definitive (60%) majority supports these rules changes I will not support the board an will continue call the board to task over their actions. I intend no malice to anyone but I damn sure am not a happy camper over these issues.. </div><div><br></div><div>Again what say the board.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Gary Courtney<br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div> <br>On Mar 16, 2012, at 11:28 PM, John Gayer <<a href="mailto:jgghome@comcast.net">jgghome@comcast.net</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
Gary,<br>
<br>
There was a weight proposal two years ago which resulted in a 115
gram allowance for Intermediate and Advanced. There was already a
weight proposal submitted this year by Joe with an increase of 200
grams for all AMA classes. Discussions surrounding the weight rule
have been going on for years and to claim that the NSRCA proposal
was made in response to Arch's weight checking plan for this year's
Nats is preposterous.<br>
<br>
John<br>
<br>
On 3/16/2012 8:30 PM, Whodaddy Whodaddy wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:B815CA19-7166-403D-A62B-26B487582F72@gmail.com" type="cite">
<div>The cd's have been enforcing the weight rule at the NATS for
years this year will be no different just more frequent given
the logistics hold up ..don't see how it makes a difference..
Sounds like an inference that we now have a weight change
proposition due to an in forcemeat of the rules .. Sounds to me
like I might not want to be apart of an organization that is run
by such thinking..</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Gary <br>
<br>
Sent from my iPhone</div>
<div><br>
On Mar 16, 2012, at 9:19 PM, John Gayer <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:jgghome@comcast.net">jgghome@comcast.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
Arch,<br>
I certainly was not objecting to you enforcing the weight rule
at the Nats. I'm with you 100% on that and any other rule
enforcement at the Nats you can afford to do. You have to
admit that your decision to weigh every plane created a lot of
"discussion" on this list.<br>
Can't see anyone going to the Nats knowing they are going to
get just a tearsheet and a bunch of zeros for their efforts.
Again, this is not to imply you should be doing anything
different, just that we should change the rule to encourage
participation in the future.<br>
John<br>
<br>
On 3/16/2012 7:55 PM, Archie Stafford wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:8A4BB58C-4F8E-47C2-9E99-48F0E828A4A3@md.metrocast.net" type="cite">
<div>Hey, all I did was decide to enforce an existing rule.
Actually, I didn't have to say a thing except for how it
was going to be enforced. Frankly, if I had the number of
people available to strictly enforce every rule, I would.
If nothing else my decision has at least sparked the
debate about the rule. It has never made sense to me to
never enforce it. Personally I think it needs to be left
alone, but others don't. Even this year, no one is saying
you can't fly a heavy airplane. You just wont get to keep
the scores for that round. I seriously doubt someone with
a real shot at winning would show up with a heavy airplane
anyway. People can even have their tear sheets for the
round. It just wont be listed in the results. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Arch<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPhone</div>
<div><br>
On Mar 16, 2012, at 9:48 PM, John Gayer <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:jgghome@comcast.net">jgghome@comcast.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
Point taken about having to serve notice that you are
going to enforce a rule at a local contest. Note that
Arch had to do that for the Nats this year and such a
clatter did arise....<br>
<br>
<br>
On 3/16/2012 6:53 PM, Dave Burton wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:014401cd03d8$69144dd0$3b3ce970$@net" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12
(filtered medium)">
<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:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 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";
color:black;}
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
{mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle20
{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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">John,
one issue about waive a rule notification in
really bothers me in your suggestion. Having to
post in advance 30 days that a CD will enforce a
rule is counter to any other process I’ve seen.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It
becoming clear -eliminating the max weight rule
is the only system that really works. LOL<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";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Gayer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, March 16, 2012 8:20 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> General pattern discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules
Proposals<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This won't work very well, in
my opinion. Who is going to the Nats if they start
out 5-10% behind? This does nothing to increase
attendance and is detrimental to operation of
local contests. All it takes is an unhappy pilot
feeling he was home-towned protesting vociferously
about the heavy airplane that just beat him and
demanding a weight check that might reverse the
first and second places. <br>
<br>
IF the CD denies the protest, you've lost a pilot.
If you do a weight check and it fails, then you've
lost a different pilot. To prevent this, a CD must
waive the weight rules on his sanction which is
not normally done now, although it should be. So
extra work and/or hassle for the CD and extra work
for scorekeeper/scorekeeping systems. For what
gain? A rule that will not be enforced locally and
will keep pilots away from the Nats just as much
as no weight allowance at all. <br>
<br>
At the very least, preface the rule proposal with
something like:<br>
This weight rule will be enforced at the Nats. If
a CD chooses to include this rule at a local
contest, he must publicize that fact appropriately
to all potential attendees at least 30 days prior
to the contest. <br>
<br>
At a local contest, this officially leaves us with
no weight rule at all in AMA classes. That's
probably OK as we could reject on size if needed.
Personally I would only turn someone away if they
brought a 42% Extra to fly in Masters and maybe
not even then...<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
John<br>
<br>
<br>
On 3/15/2012 7:54 AM, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:ronlock@comcast.net">ronlock@comcast.net</a>
wrote: <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Hi
All,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Here
is a copy of another proposal for
consideration by the Contest Board along with
the others that have been submitted.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">This
one does not disqualify a model for not
meeting weight limits. It imposes a score
penalty, but still allows the <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">model
to participate.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Ron
Lockhart<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>NSRCA-discussion mailing list</span><br>
<span><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a></span><br>
<span><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>NSRCA-discussion mailing list</span><br>
<span><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a></span><br>
<span><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></pre>
</blockquote>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>NSRCA-discussion mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span></div></blockquote></body></html>