<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body>Richard, funny you should mention using a modelaircraft.org address. Yesterday I tried to send an email to the NSRCA address on the website for VP Don Atwood, and Derek K. got it, lol! <br><br>Jon<br><br>Jon<br><br><div id="htc_header" style="">----- Reply message -----<br>From: "Richard Lewis" <humptybump@sbcglobal.net><br>Date: Thu, Dec 13, 2012 10:14 am<br>Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Contest board - Was Executive Board voting<br>To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><br><br></div><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV>Mark,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As for communications...you should not have to use your personal/work e-mail for this...I know I can fairly easily get an e-mail address for each CB member from various sources (the list, friends, etc...). Heck , yours is easy and you even include your workplace and phone numbers in your signature!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But it is improper to do this unless they have specifically put it out there for the purpose. The AMA could easily give each CB member an <A href="mailto:xxxx@modelaircraft.org"><FONT color=#0000ff>xxxx@modelaircraft.org</FONT></A> email address for official communicaitons...A contact form on the website would be even better and would force a user to at least enter a name and AMA number before forwarding the message....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I am certain there are many more than the "vocal minority" we see on this list that would love to provide you guys feedback in less public way than this this list..... </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Richard<BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>
<HR SIZE=1>
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm@paragon-inc.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Thu, December 13, 2012 9:46:57 AM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Contest board - Was Executive Board voting<BR></FONT><BR>I completely agree this is a good dialog. And thank you for the kind words.<BR><BR>Regarding the USA Team, everyone will be hearing a LOT from me soon. We're trying to raise a TON of money ($60,000) to cover this next WC's in South Africa and it's going to take big effort.<BR><BR>Back to the topic at hand....<BR><BR>There may be a disconnect or misunderstanding regarding the AMA's safety stance than what I think we've communicated. They're not pushing the safety guidelines to the Sigs, unless it's
something specific TO the SIG. Electric motor safety for Pattern is no different that electric motor safety throughout the AMA. When we asked the AMA if they were considering any sort of "Arming" requirements for general aircraft , or aircraft over a certain size/power rating, we were told no. When I spoke to Greg Hahn specifically about it (this was quite a while back) he stated that while the AMA wanted to endorse good procedures, creating rules of that nature around such a rapidly evolving technology had all sorts of negative implications. Everything from hampering the evolution of the technology (no clue how ESC and other possible safeguards might evolve) as well as liability issues TO MEMBERS when the safety rules aren't followed or enforced. Sometimes general guidelines are our friend.<BR><BR>As for rules without consequences... you'll find virtually unanimous support from the CB on that subject. If
there's no defined result, it's merely a guideline, or a suggestion. Not a rule. Yes, some exist like that, but they predate the existing board. This is a fairly new litmus test for the board and admittedly I'm strongly in favor of it (I actually think Verne is a champion of it as well, we both joined the CB around the same time). It's something we're actively trying to change. It would be great if the NSRCA came out with a guideline and procedure manual. Something that spoke to all of the issues that we care about, but don't plan to mandate. When ever we see a "RULE"... the first thought that goes through my head is "How will we handle the protest at the nats...". Let's be honest. ALL of our rules are only guidelines at the local level. It's the Nats where we have to deal with enforcement and protests.<BR><BR>One concern we all have (CB that is) regarding communication is only
hearing from the vocal minority. There are many that simply want to follow the rules, not necessarily alter them in any way. (Set safety issues aside for the time being). I'm talking about rules like weight, advancement, noise, etc. Contrary to popular belief, most are NOT on this list, and even those that are, most don't post. Yet their opinion as stated earlier, counts equally. When I solicit feedback at a contest, and the vast majority simply voice that they don't need, or desire a change, that weighs heavily against the outspoken few who rally on all the forums.<BR><BR>How to do a better job of communicating back and forth I don't know. My email is pretty well out there. I'm not sure everyone is open for that though.<BR><BR>-M<BR>Mark Atwood<BR>Paragon Consulting, Inc. | President<BR>5885 Landerbrook Drive Suite 130, Cleveland Ohio, 44124<BR>Phone: 440.684.3101 x102 |
Fax: 440.684.3102<BR><A href="mailto:mark.atwood@paragon-inc.com" ymailto="mailto:mark.atwood@paragon-inc.com">mark.atwood@paragon-inc.com</A><mailto:<A href="mailto:mark.atwood@paragon-inc.com" ymailto="mailto:mark.atwood@paragon-inc.com">mark.atwood@paragon-inc.com</A>> | www.paragon-inc.com<<A href="http://www.paragon-inc.com/" target=_blank>http://www.paragon-inc.com/</A>><BR><BR></DIV></DIV></div></body><