<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Tony:<br>
It seems to me if we "allow" the board to vote on the Annex, it will
still be under their control. Not a good thing. It should be under
the NSRCA control, or we will be back to square one. If they vote to
accept it, we will still be locked to the AMA for any changes we want
to make, with all their procedural mumbo-jumbo, and dilatory delays.
(Been there, Seen that.) Better that they reject it, and we adopt
it. It can be done.<br>
<br>
Bill Glaze<br>
<br>
Tony Stillman wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid007701c3af76$7a4108b0$6401a8c0@tony">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1276" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<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> </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> </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="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;">-----
Original Message ----- </div>
<div
style="background: rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0%; -moz-background-clip: initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: initial; -moz-background-origin: initial; font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>From:</b>
<a title="Rcmaster199@aol.com" href="mailto:Rcmaster199@aol.com">Rcmaster199@aol.com</a>
</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>To:</b>
<a title="discussion@nsrca.org" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</a>
</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>Sent:</b>
Wednesday, November 19, 2003 8:17 PM</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><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="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; 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>
</font></font></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>