<!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 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The comments that John makes about receiving nada
from his district is quite troubling. Certainly there were at least SOME
district V NSRCA members that voted on the rules survey, yet John feels he was
given no input and was free to vote his "feelings".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>So basically, the extensive survey was taken but it
didn't identify how people from each district voted (or did it), therefore
contest board members feel free to vote how they "feel". Sounds like a lawyer
getting a case dismissed on a technicality. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>It's pretty clear that future rules surveys (if we
ever bother to do one again) should be broken down by district, this way contest
board members can't "claim" that no one from their district gave them any input.
On the other hand, as things stand what's the point in doing the rules
survey?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Personally I'll live with whatever is decided, but
being a very logical person illogical behavior bothers me. When the majority of
"active" participants wants something, demonstrates the majority wants it, then
are ignored there is something wrong. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This can also happen in a representative
government. You Senator or Congressman doesn't have to vote the way you want
them to, but at least with them the next time around you can kick them out of
office!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Keith</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
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=vanputte@cox.net href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">Ron Van Putte</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> Monday, May 10, 2004 9:36 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Rules Proposals Final
Vote</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>John Fuqua asked me to forward the following to the NSRCA
discussion list.<BR><BR>Ron Van Putte<BR><BR>Begin forwarded message:<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B><?color><?param 0000,0000,0000>From: <?/color></B>"John
Fuqua" <<A
href="mailto:johnfuqua@gdsys.net">johnfuqua@gdsys.net</A>><BR><B><?color><?param 0000,0000,0000>Date:
<?/color></B>May 10, 2004 9:09:23 PM CDT<BR><B><?color><?param 0000,0000,0000>To: <?/color></B>"Ron Van Putte"
<<A href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">vanputte@cox.net</A>><BR><B><?color><?param 0000,0000,0000>Subject:
<?/color>RE: rules proposals final result<BR></B><BR><?fontfamily><?param Arial><?color><?param 0000,0000,FFFD><?smaller>Please
pass on to the group that the Board is an AMA Board not a NSRCA Board.
If we were an NSRCA Board Ron Van Putte's proposal on the annex system would
not have been rejected by the AMA Excutive Council. While I
respect the NSRCA survey and look at the results I represent AMA District V
not NSRCA District 3. Same for the other Board members. Just as
the Board is not in lock step with me, or anybody else for that matter, the
Board is not in lock step with the NSRCA nor should it be. Each
District member must feel out his District. If he gets input from
NSRCA members from his District than all the better. Just for the
record I received zero, nada, 0 written or email inputs from my District
members on these proposals. Others in my District have talked to me
and there was no clear consensus one way or the other leaving me to vote my
feelings.<?/smaller><?/color><?/fontfamily><BR><?fontfamily><?param Arial><?color><?param 0000,0000,FFFD><?smaller><?/smaller><?/color><?/fontfamily> <BR><?fontfamily><?param Arial><?color><?param 0000,0000,FFFD><?smaller>I
submitted the takeoff and landing proposal, again, having had another of my
district members submit it the last cycle where it failed. Just like
flying by class vice frequency of some years ago, some ideas take time to
develop. I think the proposal is superior to what we have now for a
lot of reasons. Go look at the rationale in the proposal to see the
issues. One last thought. If takeoff and landing were aerobatic
manuevers, the FAA would require all airline passengers to wear parachutes.<?/smaller><?/color><?/fontfamily><BR> <BR><?fontfamily><?param Arial><?color><?param 0000,0000,FFFD><?smaller>John
Fuqua<?/smaller><?/color><?/fontfamily><BR><?smaller>-----Original
Message-----<?/smaller><BR><B><?smaller>From:<?/smaller></B><?smaller> Ron
Van Putte [mailto:vanputte@cox.net]<?/smaller><BR><B><?smaller>Sent:<?/smaller></B><?smaller>
Monday, May 10, 2004 6:38 PM<?/smaller><BR><B><?smaller>To:<?/smaller></B><?smaller> John Fuqua<?/smaller><BR><B><?smaller>Subject:<?/smaller></B><?smaller> Fwd:
rules proposals final result<?/smaller><BR><BR>John -
FYI.<BR><BR>Ron<BR><BR>Begin forwarded message:<BR><BR><BR><B>From:
</B>patterndude@comcast.net<BR><B>Date: </B>May 10, 2004 6:27:11 PM
CDT<BR><B>To: </B>discussion@nsrca.org<BR><B>Subject: Re: rules proposals
final result</B><BR><B>Reply-To:
</B>discussion@nsrca.org<BR><BR><BR>Joe,<BR>and what would you do as a board
member if your board chairman used his bully pulpit to submit a proposal at
odds with the NSRCA?<BR>--Lance<BR><BR>--<BR>District 6
AVP<BR>www.aeroslave.com<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>