ORIGINAL: Columbus Ron
Dave, I knew these rules existed but I've never taken the time to read them. Why do some of the folks making rule proposals recently complain that their proposals were lost or that their District VP was unaware of their proposals. It seems to me that some improvements in the process at the local level need to be improved so that participants, folks making rule proposals, etc are properly represented. Perhaps we need an area (website or K-Factor section) where rule proposals and other issues are posted for all to consider. Right now, the best way to keep abreast of these issues is to follow rc universe, rc groups, flying giants, NSRCA tread and/or the K-Factor. None of these are necessarily the offical site for such information. Also, shouldn't each District VP discuss (either formally or informally) these rule proposals with his/her contituents before he/she votes on the proposal? Right now I don't think this happens on a routine basis.
Ron,
I can't say as I have "the answer" as to improving the process...but having been involved with it in varying degrees for 20+ years.....I can offer some observations/commentary -
- A single individual can submit a proposal without discussing it with any others involved in the event, and they could even submit a proposal that they know has no popular support. Right or wrong, majority rules. Honestly, I'm not aware of anyone who has followed the rules (and I think they are clear enough for anyone that takes the time to read and learn the process) and not been properly represented. I am aware of any number of proposals that died an early death, and the proposer was less than happy about being in the minority, and may have claimed any number of things which most certainly impart a negative cloud on the process.
- In the past, a good number of the AMA RC Aerobatics Contest Board positions were held by guys that were rarely seen at events (or hadn't been to an event in the last 10 years), and their votes reflected their lack of activity. And these guys rarely sought input, and not being known to the current flyers, they rarely received any input. Not good. Currently, the Board Members are (relative to the past) very active and very accessible....much better situation.
- I don't think it is the responsibility of the RCACB members to contact each and every constituent to ask their opinion. I think it is the responsibility of the RCACB members to be accessible and responsive, and to put information out to their constituents (contests, seminars, tradeshows, email groups/lists/forums, etc).
- I know in the NE, the AMA D1 and D2 RCACB members are pretty reguarly making announcements and asking questions at local contests, trade shows, and judging seminars. And I know they get very little input and feedback, and would love to have more. Without question in my mind, I hear more people complaining about the results after the fact, and these people did not take part in the process. Again, this does nothing more than impart a negative cloud on the process.
I agree 100% with the point made earlier in this thread that RCACB members should not be able to submit proposals, as there is ample opportunity for conflicts of interest. I have made the suggestion before that rules proposals should not be submitted by any member of the RCACB or elected/appointed officer of the NSRCA. However, the rules do no prohibit this. Perhaps I should submit a proposal to include this in the rules. However, in practice, I don't think it would make a difference, as an idea from a Board Member or Officer could be "suggested" to another individual as a proposal.
Regards,
Dave