<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1276" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jerry:<BR><BR>Yes, I think that is where we are now
headed. AMA wants to start moving the NATS around again. They only
want it held at Muncie every other year, with the SIGS hosting the event in the
"off" years. Well, if this is going to happen, we are going to have to
have a little more control on the Pattern rules and processes.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This next year will provide more answers. I'm
sure, based on the discussions I am seeing on this list, that we will be pushing
the AMA to relinquish more and more control on our event. There response
will determine our future actions.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tony Stillman<BR>Radio South<BR>3702 N. Pace Blvd.<BR>Pensacola, FL
32505<BR>1-800-962-7802<BR><A
href="http://www.radiosouthrc.com">www.radiosouthrc.com</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Rcmaster199@aol.com
href="mailto:Rcmaster199@aol.com">Rcmaster199@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, November 19, 2003 8:17
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Bigger issues--Long as usual
from me</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=arial,helvetica><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2
FAMILY="SANSSERIF">In a message dated 11/19/2003 6:52:04 PM Eastern Standard
Time, <A href="mailto:jbudd@QNET.COM">jbudd@QNET.COM</A> writes:<BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
TYPE="CITE">>Am I getting a signal from this mailing list that we need to
remove <BR>>ourselves from AMA and do everything ourselves?<BR><BR>I
think the signal (read message) is that the NSRCA <BR>Officers/Leadership
need to be willing to explore all reasonable <BR>possibilities concerning
what is best for the NSRCA membership (the <BR>entire membership, not just
the F3A community). If that means <BR>backing away from SIG status to
achieve the results NSRCA needs then <BR>that ought to be considered.
I suspect that it won't get that far <BR>though - AMA may be slow and
bureaucracy laden, but they're not <BR>stupid (well... give me that one if
only to make my point!).<BR><BR>Thx, Jerry</BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Jerry, et
al<BR><BR>Not sure how much financial support the AMA gives the various WC
Teams; for the Pattern Team, Tony should have a pretty good
idea.<BR><BR>Besides the insurance deal the AMA provides to all and the
support for the Team, what other benefit do they provide us? The main one I
can think of is the 160,000 +/-voice lobby in Washington, in regard to flying
sites for example. In my opinion, breaking totally away from the AMA may not
be in our best interest in the long run. <BR><BR>Breaking away from the
antiquated rules procedures is in our best interest and I would support such a
move. <BR><BR>My thinking is this: if we were to make our own rules and
enforce them as we saw best, it would require that we ignore only the AMA's
Pattern related rules. Basically, it would make the AMA Pattern Contest Board
totally moot for our purposes. Would that make a difference to AMA? I would
guess that they wouldn't like it due to losing their control over Pattern, but
what could they really do about it? <BR><BR>We would still need to abide by
all safety related rules, but that's it. Obviously, without a flying site, the
whole excersize becomes moot. The AMA's Washington voice may be feeble, but
I'd like to believe that it has helped some of us keep some of
these.<BR><BR>Contest Directors would still apply for the AMA sanctions as
they do now, but strictly for safety and insurance concerns. The rules we fly
under would be totally our own. The events could still attract non-NSRCA
members since they would still be advertised in the MA magazine.<BR><BR>It
seems to me that AMA policy (lack of monthly reporting and coverage of
large Pattern events are two very recent examples) has done quite a bit to
alienate us from the fold. This isn't intended as a means to get even or
anything silly like that. It seems to me that many of the members are simply
fed-up with the ancient processes AMA requires, and they (we) want some things
done better, easier, faster. After all, my car insurer isn't telling me how to
drive my car. <BR><BR>Matt K<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>