<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>Ron </P>
<P>I think you should post your original of this thread on the NSRCA site with bold letters and an eye catching Icon <IMG height=12 src="http://graphics.hotmail.com/emthdown.gif" width=12>of someone doing something un appropriate to us, just in case there are those who visit the site but don't take part in the discussion forum who may be intrested.</P>
<P>Another place that it could be posted is R/C Universe I feel sure that it is monitored by many who may be intrested also</P>
<P>Sorry I couldn't find the proper Icon </P>
<P>Buddy<BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: "Mike Hester" <KERLOCK@ATTBI.COM>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: discussion@nsrca.org
<DIV></DIV>>To: <DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG>
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: Annex Proposal
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:03:36 -0800
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>----- Original Message -----
<DIV></DIV>>From: "Ron Van Putte" <VANPUTTE@NUC.NET>
<DIV></DIV>>To: <DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG>
<DIV></DIV>>Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 9:32 AM
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: Annex Proposal
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > Jerry Stebbins wrote:
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > > Ron, it appears to me that we should let the AMA process run it's
<DIV></DIV>> > > course. Let them make their decision based on the facts, and put it out
<DIV></DIV>> > > for all to examine. Then we should have the opportunity to demand a
<DIV></DIV>> > > truthful, and logical response to the process, and the basis for their
<DIV></DIV>> > > decision. The Board is, by definition, supposed to be responsive to the
<DIV></DIV>> > > Membership!
<DIV></DIV>> > > I am against any compromise that has no rationale as to why the proposed
<DIV></DIV>> > > approach is wrong.We have the IMAC precident on our side.If we
<DIV></DIV>> > > compromise, then that says our proposal is not sound.
<DIV></DIV>> > > Because Steve and Dave have some kind of insight, I wonder what/who is
<DIV></DIV>> > > driving this decision. I would rather have them ( the Board ) explain,
<DIV></DIV>> > > if they reject the proposal out of hand, why they are discriminating
<DIV></DIV>> > > between the SIG's, and then we can determine the action, legal or
<DIV></DIV>> > > otherwise, that we want to take.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > Does anyone not agree with the above?
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > Ron Van Putte
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > =====================================
<DIV></DIV>> > # To be removed from this list, send a message to
<DIV></DIV>> > # discussion-request@nsrca.org
<DIV></DIV>> > # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
<DIV></DIV>> > #
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>=====================================
<DIV></DIV>># To be removed from this list, send a message to
<DIV></DIV>># discussion-request@nsrca.org
<DIV></DIV>># and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
<DIV></DIV>>#
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>MSN 8 helps <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMHEN/2023">ELIMINATE E-MAIL VIRUSES.</a> Get 2 months FREE*.</html>