Hossfly

It's all there, except for the interesting stuff. [sm=confused_smile.gif]

http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutam...ecminutes.aspx

JUGFLIER

Hoss, your link isnt working.

depfife

My Feedback: (14)

I edited Hoss' post to make the link active.

abel_pranger

Hoss-

Surely you must have found it interesting that the Nominating Committee met for 15 minutes......

Abel

KidEpoxy

No wonder they didnt have time to read Hoss's resume,
but then 15minutes is plenty of time to kick-out anybody that doesnt toe the Party Line


So how many disctricts are Incumbant Only ballots, and how many are not even that?

Silent-AV8R

Yep, the way I heard was that they were scared that Hoss would sweep it. After all he came so close in unseating Doug Holland for the EVP position. And didn't he also run for his District VP position, and again some dark conspiracy prevented him from winning that one. Surely some sort of vote rigging to keep Hoss out.

Or perhaps the committee saw a nominee who failed to win an election in his own district, and then failed in an election for the EVP position and decided that perhaps he was not a viable candidate.

Personally I like the conspiracy theory better. Come to think of it the last time I was in Muncie I KNOW I saw some black helicopters hovering over the AMA HQ building!!!

KidEpoxy

For all the Hoss History you credit them with knowing,
you'd think they would have known he was elected before.... yet that guy didnt.

Maybe if they spent more than 15 minutes they migt have read the resume,
and learned things that might make him a better candidate than their OPINION of how electable he is without any actually looking into his qualifications.

Maybe you are right, maybe qualifications dont matter to that commitee, so reading resumes would be a waste of time.
So they scheduled accordingly: 15mins to keep it a One Party Ballot

JUGFLIER

By the same argument, Kid, If Hoss was kept off because he was un-electable then why are some of the other guys on there? I am told this is a one horse race. The other two are just there for looks. One it is said couldn't win anything, why is he on the ballot?

Silent-AV8R

As I understand the process the Bylaws limit the ballot to three people. Somebody had to get cut and it was Horrace. And it is just plain petty to think that the committee did not consider his qualifications. Much easier than trying to understand if there were valid reasons in the eyes of those charged with the responsibility to determine the ballot.

I am not saying they were right or wrong, all I am saying is that it is silly to think that they either failed to consider his qualifications or are acting in some covert manner to deny us the ability to elect Horrace.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

SA,

Your perception of reality differs greatly from most others.


Hoss said:
"as one other of your fellow DVPs called me last week apologizing for his snub of me at the EC meeting. He asked if I had been a DVP sometime before. I suppose he never read the resume either"

Hoss and I disagree on things often enough… usually philosophical in nature but one thing seems constant… his assertions usually ring true. Either the DVP wasn’t paying attention or Hoss did not get full consideration. That is the true reality no matter how you want to spin it.

KidEpoxy

Silent-
If you want claim the committee was Incompetant rather than Petty,
I'm ok with that.

Or are you saying that it was a adequate job of judging qualifications when a guy that didnt even know Hoss was a DVP or not

Why are the others there?
To heep Hoss off.
Why is Hoss off? The ballot is full of qualified folks already... a one horse race as you put it. Lord knows we wouldnt want to put someone that might make it a 2 party ballot.

But it would take more than 15mins to read candidates qualifications, so lets just put up our buddies & get some donuts

KidEpoxy

Jug said in another thread that this will be a Staus Quo election year.
How many districts are voting for DVP this year?

Silent-AV8R

Well, I claimed no such thing. But it matters not what is said, you few who account for 95% of the posts in this forum will twist things as you see fit to amuse yourselves. It was amusing for a little while, now it is just sort of sad.

KidEpoxy

Hey, if you wanna explain the Valid Reason to not even know if a potential nominee was even a DVP before,
go right ahead,
I'd love to hear why it was valid that the guys that shot him down didnt know anything about him.

Explain it without the twisting you say I've put on it,
give us the UnTwisted version of HOW they didnt know he was DVP before, yet shot him down.


"now it is just sort of sad"
No, It started sad.
Sad that they didnt bother to look at his paperwork/qualifications before shooting him down.
Sad that who the EC want as president outweighs who the members want... IF it is true that he was shot down because they thought they wouldnt be able to work with that guy.

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

Duh- I count three D-I, D-V, and D-IX One, five and nine. 1,5,9.

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

I not have records for elections in which Horrace may have been involved prior to 2000. Since he was a DVP obviousl he won those elections.

2000 election
District VIII
Dr. Sandy Frank 2333
George Aldrich 5
Horrace Cain 3
Bill Laboyteaux 3
Gary Baker 2
Max Blose 2
Alan Durel 2
Otis Everts 2
Bill Lee 2
Charles Stevens 2
Invalid 50 (votes for Mickey Mouse, Elvis, non members, and other nonsense)
Others w/one vote 45

2002 Election
Executive Vice President
Doug Holland 12,585 (incumbent)
Doug Barry 3,689
Horrace Cain 3,155
Total 19,429 ~ 12%

2003 Dist VIII
Sandy Frank 1931
Horrace Cain 553
Michael Moss 471

2004 and on I do not have record for, perhaps Horrace can post the 2005 record.

Silent-AV8R

Well, they DID know about him. You not knowing that they knew is irrelevant.

Again, Horrace wants you to think this is the case. But he knows perfectly well that the people who made the decision know him and his qualifications and experience.

Using Red's post above, here is how Horrace fared in the last 3 elections (2 of which were within his own District:

2000 DVP = 0.13% of total
2002 EVP = 16.2% of total
2003 DVP = 18.7% of total.

So I guess you can argue that he is gaining traction.

Hossfly

No cigars for that ASSumption, savav8r. Anyone on that council that doesn't know me, or at least OF me, just has to be one ignorant piece of work. I was very surprised when a DVP called me and asked such a question AFTER he had had the paperwork in his hands. I find it very unprofessional that an elected official having the responsibility to select member-nominated candidates to such a job as the President of the Academy of Model Aeronautics could have such a lapse of memory.
Of course if I had been given the opportunity to be an official candidate, then he most likely would NOT be on that ballot. Let's see now, if you, SAV, were to do some real thinking, when I use to go to Phoenix to race Warbirds, I did a lot of persuasion to a person there to get him to run for DVP, so he knows me well. Now I worked on a committee with an eastern DVP to get a thing approved by AMA, so he knows my background. All the DVPs, except D-XIII, have seen my resume a few times. So that mid-country DVP must have just had a "Senior Moment".

Using Red's figures, I question WHY Red included the 2000 election when I WAS NOT RUNNING for anything? [:-]

I question WHY Red "forgot" the 2005 EVP election with a tad bit higher percentage.

So if anyone wants to know what Horrace (Hossfly) really thinks, here it is:
Not one DVP wanted to take the chance that with the significant number of member nominations that I had, especially from the different sections of the country, that Horrace Cain had a darn good chance to unseat the GOB syndrome, and none there wanted to have to face me if that should have happened. Such would have been a mandate from the membership that business-as-usual would have to come to an end.

Now all will remain cozy and no real work will be required.

KidEpoxy

Last 3?
what about the ones he won?
And the one he got by write in. BY WRITE IN and he still won.
yes, clearly the guy that won twice is incapable of winning

....oh, wait, they didnt even know he won election & was in office.
maybe they had someone handy like Red to give them a Loss Only chart

I can just imagine a chat like that-

Dont bother putting him on the ballot. The guy just cant win.
Well, except for when he did before.
What? He did? Just a fluke, he is just incapable of winning.
What about the other time he won.
Flukes! All Flukes!!! He is incapable of winning, it is just not in him... look at the numbers that stop after just 3 years!
Did you even read his resume?
Uh.... Who let this guy in here? We need to get rid of this Hater

But thanx for your input Silent,
the chart of Losses Only clears up how they must have done it,
too bad they didnt get to see any of the victories' numbers... or know how manytimes he won times before,
but hey, 15 mins aint a lot of time to read stuff like resumes


(I just hope the Red's Big Chart of Losses Only is more accurate than his 8/10 EC for JC vs SK, but I figure it is, this aint closed door stuff)


Very handy way to chart past performance,
just dont list the victories & you clearly show a loser.

John Casey

My Feedback: (4)

The corruption here sounds very familar..... yes it is sad.

KidEpoxy

maybe Red wanted to show that in second place with 50 was INVALID.
Makes me wonder what made all those folks say it was invalid?

But the numbers dont lie,
if you skip over the high recent high numbers,
and stop before the numbers show up with Hoss winning,
and include years he wasnt running,
those select few random points paint the whole picture <excluding all the high points naturally>

Why didnt Red include the 50's & 60's ballots Hoss wanst on either? That would show his data to be more than just a select few random races.

JUGFLIER

All one need to do is log onto Reds website on the District 5 website and see the nature of the posts there, it will explain his distortion of the facts.

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

I would like to clarify here that Jugflier is referring to the AMA District 5 chat group that Red runs on yahoo groups. It can be found here [link]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amadist5/[/link]

Ken

rcuman

Can we all get some verification of posts on the D-V Yahoo group that suggests RScofield distorted any of the facts? Lets put your money where your mouth is.

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

I invite anyone to visit the D-V yahoo group Messages and see where JugFlier's "distortion of the facts" come from.