[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

[John Gayer]

Ron,
Since I'm kind of standing alone here as far as I can tell, a survey 
apparently has already been taken.
John

Ron Van Putte wrote:

> No.  I am saying that there has not been a survey by NSRCA, so the 
> NSRCA leadership has no consensus upon which to base a rule change 
> proposal.  Individuals are always able (and encouraged) to submit rule 
> change proposals.  It is only in recent history that the NSRCA 
> sponsored submitting proposals and even then, the proposals were 
> always submitted by individuals.  
>
> Ron Van Putte
>
> On Aug 15, 2007, at 4:44 PM, John Gayer wrote:
>
>> Ron,
>>
>> Are you saying that I since I have no support from the NSRCA 
>> leadership, I am entitled to go my own way and submit a rule change 
>> directly to the R/C Aerobatics contest board?
>> If there is no support for my viewpoint here, then I would be 
>> seriously wasting my time taking your advice.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> Ron Van Putte wrote:
>>
>>> Well, it's your prerogative to take exception to the existing rules 
>>> and it's also your prerogative to submit a rule change proposal 
>>> (soon) for a rule doing what you want to do.  If passed by the R/C 
>>> Aerobatics contest board, the rules would go into effect in January 
>>> 2009.
>>>
>>> Ron Van Putte
>>>
>>> On Aug 15, 2007, at 3:36 PM, John Gayer wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ron,
>>>> I take exception to those rules. There should be only one 
>>>> destination class. Why shouldn't there be a mandatory move from 
>>>> Masters to F3A? They are just two patterns with a natural 
>>>> progression as there is between Advanced and Masters.
>>>> Parking and sandbagging is a mental state, not a rules violation.
>>>> john
>>>>
>>>> Ron Van Putte wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The Master class is the top AMA class and there is no mandatory 
>>>>> move from the Master class to F3A, so how can there be "parkers" 
>>>>> or "sandbaggers"?  
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron Van Putte
>>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 15, 2007, at 2:10 PM, John Gayer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> how about changing the AMA advancemant rule and keep it very simple?
>>>>>> Your first contest of the year will determine your class for the 
>>>>>> year. You may go up one class at any time during the year but may 
>>>>>> not go back down during the year. At the start of the next year 
>>>>>> you may drop back one class at your option, stay where you are or 
>>>>>> go up a class.
>>>>>> This is simple enough that your fellow competitiors will know if 
>>>>>> you are following the rules. It will also be up to your fellow 
>>>>>> competitiors to insure that you are not sandbagging.
>>>>>> I also feel strongly that sandbagging in Masters should not be 
>>>>>> allowed. If you disregard Sportsman, then half of the classes 
>>>>>> allow parking. Obviously, F3A has to be a parking lot but I see 
>>>>>> no reason to allow this behavior in Masters. As a competant 
>>>>>> advanced pilot of somewhat advanced years, I have very little 
>>>>>> interest in moving to Masters in order to spend the rest of my 
>>>>>> pattern years trying to break 900 against the parkers.
>>>>>> I fail to see the logic in having two destination classes. 
>>>>>> Shouldn't we all aspire to progress to FAI? The current Masters 
>>>>>> schedule is designed as a stepping stone to Masters. Let's use it 
>>>>>> that way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John Gayer
>>>>>> NSRCA 632
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BUDDYonRC at aol.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There was a proposal on the last rules cycle that would allow a 
>>>>>>> person to move up and test his ability then move back if he 
>>>>>>> had not attained the skills required for the higher class.  I 
>>>>>>> personally think it is a good idea and I also see no need for 
>>>>>>> the point system like someone said if someone abuses the 
>>>>>>> privilege we can solicit Earl and four other guys his size to 
>>>>>>> take him behind the barn and splain to him why he will be moving 
>>>>>>> up. I believe peer pressure is all the control we need.
>>>>>>> I think this is worth a try.
>>>>>>> For those who have the ability and desire to achieve a spot at 
>>>>>>> the top I don't see that we have a problem.
>>>>>>> Buddy    
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com 
>>>>>>> <http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000982>.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>>>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>>>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
>>>>>> <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
>>>> <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
>> <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070815/a8ed4d21/attachment.html