Is the largest SIG in the AMA devoted to MR/Drone racing? Yup, looks that way!
10-29-2016, 06:01 PM
#76
So what happens at my club doesn't matter and isn't reality, only what happens at other clubs? LOL
What if a member ONLY flies at their home field (lots of those, majority, actually) and doesn't travel to events, their opinion is "lesser" than one who does?
Following that logic, jet pilots should count more! LOL
Astro
What if a member ONLY flies at their home field (lots of those, majority, actually) and doesn't travel to events, their opinion is "lesser" than one who does?
Following that logic, jet pilots should count more! LOL
Astro
Again with the "lesser" issue....are you channeling someone elses' papacy/unwashed unworthy insecurities? It's played out.....always a follower, never a leader. Nobody said anything of the kind. I can't even possibly help you to understand how one dimensional a viewpoint would be if someone is only exposed to one experience. Even you can see that right? If you only eat at your Mexican lunch special place everyday (before reading your MA mag), how could you ever talk about the food down the street at the Italian place? Applied to the instant matter, how could you possibly know what's going on across the country (and now world) with modeling, specifically regarding fields and clubs, if you only flew at one. Nothing wrong with flying at one place either by the way....before that becomes more fodder.
C'mon now, stop reaching and trying to find a point to argue about, and stop inserting non issues into the discussion. What else have you got on point, or will this just go the normal route?
10-29-2016, 06:13 PM
#77
what happens at your club is merely what happens at your club. It's a tiny piece of what is happening in the hobby overall and not indicative of anything on a larger scale.. I'm lucky enough to belong to 4 clubs in two states, each one is very different. I'm lucky enough to visit many others, all their own kinda places. I also read here, and elsewhere (including that MA rag) to get a better understanding of what's going on. Even then, I can only form my opinions on a limited basis.
LOL
Astro
10-29-2016, 06:26 PM
#78
Again...trying to hard. Where have I ever said my opinions are more valid than yours or anyone's? Seriously, I know you re on a jag here and getting support, but strive for some honesty here. I've simply never said or intimated what you claim. My experiences are only different, not more valid or more true than any others.
11-06-2016, 06:58 AM
#79
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-06-2016, 03:09 PM
#81
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
Last edited by rcmiket; 11-06-2016 at 03:12 PM.
11-07-2016, 05:06 AM
#84
Since all SIG's are allowed to have non flying members, then simply the fact that one has more membership still makes it the larger SIG. I doubt there is much difference in the ration of flying VS non-flying members. Most of the non flying members are probably wives who help with the organization and competition meets and most are likely non paying members as well.
11-07-2016, 05:16 AM
#85
Mike I look at it this way , if someone says something like "The MR sig is the biggest sig in all of the AMA !" and I want to see if this is for real or if it's somehow based on bogus information , I'll try to look at as many surrounding details as possible as to how this stellar performer compares to all the other sigs to establish if there is an outside reason , beyond popularity , why this would be so . Say for instance every other AMA sig had strictly required AMA membership and this one didn't , well that would be a mitigating factor in the increased numbers , right ? But no , all AMA sigs appear to be open to non AMA members so that can't be a reason for the unusually high participation in this AMA sig VS all the others . So now we look further into things , like for instance we look at the cost to join . I am assuming that you paid nothing to join the MR sig ? Just to see if cost may be a factor I randomly looked at a couple of the other sigs and found that there is indeed a cost to join most all of the other sigs , in fact the LSF being the only one I looked at that had no annual membership dues . Some of the others were ;
IMAC = $40
IRCHA = $25
JPO = $25
MACA = $30
MECA = $20 for "internet membership" and $40 for "print membership"
So it could easily be asserted that maybe something more than just the rising popularity of MRs could be behind the astronomical numbers , a free membership VS a paid one being one really good reason for the numbers to be so high . I will well imagine that folks who belong to IMAC for $40 a year most certainly do have one IMAC membership and one only . But a free "no strings attached" membership could possibly have a single person signing up multiple times because that's what some folks will do , in the same way that the "sock puppet" account exists on free chat boards . Once there is even a tiny amount of "skin in the game" in the form of a membership fee , that's where you'll see the the separation of the actual hobbyists of that flying type (MR , fixed wing , whatever) VS those who sign up "just because it's free" . The buried question of course being of those 11K members , how many paying members would that translate to if this sig had a membership fee on par with an average of all the other sig's membership fees ?
Again , none of this is a shot at the MR sig in the least , merely a look at possible reasons for the high numbers VS the other sigs to see if other than the popularity of the MRs alone may play a role .
IMAC = $40
IRCHA = $25
JPO = $25
MACA = $30
MECA = $20 for "internet membership" and $40 for "print membership"
So it could easily be asserted that maybe something more than just the rising popularity of MRs could be behind the astronomical numbers , a free membership VS a paid one being one really good reason for the numbers to be so high . I will well imagine that folks who belong to IMAC for $40 a year most certainly do have one IMAC membership and one only . But a free "no strings attached" membership could possibly have a single person signing up multiple times because that's what some folks will do , in the same way that the "sock puppet" account exists on free chat boards . Once there is even a tiny amount of "skin in the game" in the form of a membership fee , that's where you'll see the the separation of the actual hobbyists of that flying type (MR , fixed wing , whatever) VS those who sign up "just because it's free" . The buried question of course being of those 11K members , how many paying members would that translate to if this sig had a membership fee on par with an average of all the other sig's membership fees ?
Again , none of this is a shot at the MR sig in the least , merely a look at possible reasons for the high numbers VS the other sigs to see if other than the popularity of the MRs alone may play a role .
11-07-2016, 05:20 AM
#86
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you bother to scroll down to the bottom of the application? All SIG's are allowed to have non flying members. If they checked off the box No for question #2 "Does your organization encourage AMA membership for those U.S. members who fly?". Then the AMA should deny the request.
Mike
11-07-2016, 07:45 AM
#87
Did you bother to scroll down to the bottom of the application? All SIG's are allowed to have non flying members. If they checked off the box No for question #2 "Does your organization encourage AMA membership for those U.S. members who fly?". Then the AMA should deny the request.
Good afternoon folks and welcome to my latest RCU AMA forum Poll ! It has been discussed in a different thread that one can indeed be a member of an AMA S.I.G. (Special Interest Group) without actually being an AMA member . Gotta admit here , I always thought that in order to be a member of a subgroup , one had to first be a member of the main group that the subgroup has came from . My reasoning in our case here being how can a member of an AMA SIG who is not otherwise an AMA member actually practice the catered to activity , since no AMA = no AMA insurance which is required for all AMA related activities ?
The Polling is simple ;
YES = folks should have to first be an AMA member* before they can join an AMA SIG .
NO = folks should NOT have to first be an AMA member before they can join an AMA SIG .
* PS , regarding foreign members of AMA SIGs , it would naturally follow that an answer in the affirmative would include them having to be a member of their home country's equivalent to the AMA , like MAAC for Canada and so on , or the AMA , if they wanted to join an AMA SIG .
Last edited by init4fun; 11-07-2016 at 09:13 AM.
11-07-2016, 09:02 AM
#88
Seems if they are going to have rules or guidelines for their sig's then they should enforce them to some degree and if not then change them.
As it stands as a mgp chapter organizer I have no way to see which mgp member is or is not an ama member.
For our chapter WE make sure any member who wants to join is an ama member as it makes sense( to me anyway) that if you want to join a local chapter then you are already flying .
I'm all for folks who don't fly wanting to help out but shouldn't they be part of the auxiliary?
Seems to me that folks joining mgp have been flying in one form or another and want to fly/learn to fly fpv racing quads and fpv racing wings. I don't think they are joining to just put up banners flags, gates, etc....or bake cookies for fundraisers.
As it stands as a mgp chapter organizer I have no way to see which mgp member is or is not an ama member.
For our chapter WE make sure any member who wants to join is an ama member as it makes sense( to me anyway) that if you want to join a local chapter then you are already flying .
I'm all for folks who don't fly wanting to help out but shouldn't they be part of the auxiliary?
Seems to me that folks joining mgp have been flying in one form or another and want to fly/learn to fly fpv racing quads and fpv racing wings. I don't think they are joining to just put up banners flags, gates, etc....or bake cookies for fundraisers.
11-07-2016, 10:07 AM
#89
Yes Sport I did bother to scroll down and read each and every word . In fact , the very fact that a group of folks can become an AMA sig without requiring AMA membership was not only verified several days ago , it was the basis for a poll you may remember ?
PS , if you go check the poll results , you'll find that even though the AMA does indeed allow non AMA member SIG membership , the greater majority of our fellow AMA forum posters do in fact believe there should be no SIG membership without first having an AMA membership .
PS , if you go check the poll results , you'll find that even though the AMA does indeed allow non AMA member SIG membership , the greater majority of our fellow AMA forum posters do in fact believe there should be no SIG membership without first having an AMA membership .
I think you need to go read the requirements section of the application again. It specifically says that flying members must be AMA members, unless from a foreign country. The numbers that would join but do not fly or are from a foreign country (thus likely a member of that countries organization) would be very small and hardly worth arguing about.
11-07-2016, 10:26 AM
#90
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems if they are going to have rules or guidelines for their sig's then they should enforce them to some degree and if not then change them.
As it stands as a mgp chapter organizer I have no way to see which mgp member is or is not an ama member.
For our chapter WE make sure any member who wants to join is an ama member as it makes sense( to me anyway) that if you want to join a local chapter then you are already flying .
I'm all for folks who don't fly wanting to help out but shouldn't they be part of the auxiliary?
Seems to me that folks joining mgp have been flying in one form or another and want to fly/learn to fly fpv racing quads and fpv racing wings. I don't think they are joining to just put up banners flags, gates, etc....or bake cookies for fundraisers.
As it stands as a mgp chapter organizer I have no way to see which mgp member is or is not an ama member.
For our chapter WE make sure any member who wants to join is an ama member as it makes sense( to me anyway) that if you want to join a local chapter then you are already flying .
I'm all for folks who don't fly wanting to help out but shouldn't they be part of the auxiliary?
Seems to me that folks joining mgp have been flying in one form or another and want to fly/learn to fly fpv racing quads and fpv racing wings. I don't think they are joining to just put up banners flags, gates, etc....or bake cookies for fundraisers.
Mike.
11-07-2016, 10:51 AM
#91
I think you need to go read the requirements section of the application again. It specifically says that flying members must be AMA members, unless from a foreign country. The numbers that would join but do not fly or are from a foreign country (thus likely a member of that countries organization) would be very small and hardly worth arguing about.
Sport , buddy , nobody was arguing about anything , and the sub issue of "flying VS non flying" members is basically THE premise as far as the original poll question I asked was concerned . Of course if one is not an AMA member one can not fly at any AMA event , and that in and itself is the most compelling reason to have it be such that AMA (or MAAC , or whichever other foreign aeromodeling organization one may belong to) membership be required before one can join any subgroup of the AMA . You obviously feel differently , that's fine , but I believe it should be AMA first and then AMA SIG second if one so desires . Having no AMA membership required and no dues collected amounts to nothing more than a "Me Too" list of folks with absolutely no skin in the game whatsoever , a great way to pad the membership rolls but is that any kinds of reflection of actual numbers of participants ? With AMA required SIG memberships it would be pretty much assured that the folks are actually practicing the flying subgenre the SIG caters to instead of signing up (perhaps multiple times) to enhance an image of growth that isn't reflective of what's actually going on .
11-07-2016, 01:30 PM
#92
I really don't understand the complaint. When I answered the poll I did not consider the people who just show up with their family and flip hamberger's or just watch. Or maybe can no longer fly for some reason and want to support the SIG. The rule is that flying members must join the SIG. They must show that the numbers of flying and non flying members. So what if they pad their numbers? Why should you care? Do you think the AMA is going to abandon you because drones may outnumber so called traditional modeller's. I doubt it as free flight and control line is still kicking.
11-07-2016, 01:44 PM
#93
I really don't understand the complaint. When I answered the poll I did not consider the people who just show up with their family and flip hamberger's or just watch. Or maybe can no longer fly for some reason and want to support the SIG. The rule is that flying members must join the SIG. They must show that the numbers of flying and non flying members. So what if they pad their numbers? Why should you care? Do you think the AMA is going to abandon you because drones may outnumber so called traditional modeller's. I doubt it as free flight and control line is still kicking.
Sport if you remember here I'm not the one who has anything against drones vs traditional craft so long as both are being flown per AMA rules . How many times now have I said it's not the aircraft , it's if it's flown with or against the AMA rules that decides whether I'm for it or not ? Not that any of that has to do with the reason I think an AMA sig member should first be an AMA member , but since you mentioned it I figured I'd address it . And again , it's not a "complaint" , nor "argument" , nor anything else but a discussion that really doesn't need "So what Why should you care" types of posts to get one's point across . You don't think AMA sig membership should also include AMA membership and I do , no need for the ruffled feathers of the talk of whether one thinks the AMA will be abandoning anybody , a simple conversation of policy being had here ...
11-07-2016, 01:47 PM
#94
Seems if they are going to have rules or guidelines for their sig's then they should enforce them to some degree and if not then change them.
As it stands as a mgp chapter organizer I have no way to see which mgp member is or is not an ama member.
For our chapter WE make sure any member who wants to join is an ama member as it makes sense( to me anyway) that if you want to join a local chapter then you are already flying .
I'm all for folks who don't fly wanting to help out but shouldn't they be part of the auxiliary?
Seems to me that folks joining mgp have been flying in one form or another and want to fly/learn to fly fpv racing quads and fpv racing wings. I don't think they are joining to just put up banners flags, gates, etc....or bake cookies for fundraisers.
As it stands as a mgp chapter organizer I have no way to see which mgp member is or is not an ama member.
For our chapter WE make sure any member who wants to join is an ama member as it makes sense( to me anyway) that if you want to join a local chapter then you are already flying .
I'm all for folks who don't fly wanting to help out but shouldn't they be part of the auxiliary?
Seems to me that folks joining mgp have been flying in one form or another and want to fly/learn to fly fpv racing quads and fpv racing wings. I don't think they are joining to just put up banners flags, gates, etc....or bake cookies for fundraisers.
11-07-2016, 02:52 PM
#95
Sport if you remember here I'm not the one who has anything against drones vs traditional craft so long as both are being flown per AMA rules . How many times now have I said it's not the aircraft , it's if it's flown with or against the AMA rules that decides whether I'm for it or not ? Not that any of that has to do with the reason I think an AMA sig member should first be an AMA member , but since you mentioned it I figured I'd address it . And again , it's not a "complaint" , nor "argument" , nor anything else but a discussion that really doesn't need "So what Why should you care" types of posts to get one's point across . You don't think AMA sig membership should also include AMA membership and I do , no need for the ruffled feathers of the talk of whether one thinks the AMA will be abandoning anybody , a simple conversation of policy being had here ...I still don't get it. Flying members must be ama. So grandpa who doesn't fly does not have to be ama. What's wrong with that?
11-07-2016, 05:06 PM
#96
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sport , buddy , nobody was arguing about anything , and the sub issue of "flying VS non flying" members is basically THE premise as far as the original poll question I asked was concerned . Of course if one is not an AMA member one can not fly at any AMA event , and that in and itself is the most compelling reason to have it be such that AMA (or MAAC , or whichever other foreign aeromodeling organization one may belong to) membership be required before one can join any subgroup of the AMA . You obviously feel differently , that's fine , but I believe it should be AMA first and then AMA SIG second if one so desires . Having no AMA membership required and no dues collected amounts to nothing more than a "Me Too" list of folks with absolutely no skin in the game whatsoever , a great way to pad the membership rolls but is that any kinds of reflection of actual numbers of participants ? With AMA required SIG memberships it would be pretty much assured that the folks are actually practicing the flying subgenre the SIG caters to instead of signing up (perhaps multiple times) to enhance an image of growth that isn't reflective of what's actually going on .Half of the team flying one these thingies is a spotter per AMA rules, even though he has zip to do other than be a spectator since any malfunction on the part of the UAS, or control or video link, or the operator' gray matter will result a crash within milliseconds. Why shouldn't the spotter be allowed to belong the SIG without being an AMA member?
Facetiously, CJ
11-07-2016, 06:12 PM
#97
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Init,
Half of the team flying one these thingies is a spotter per AMA rules, even though he has zip to do other than be a spectator since any malfunction on the part of the UAS, or control or video link, or the operator' gray matter will result a crash within milliseconds. Why shouldn't the spotter be allowed to belong the SIG without being an AMA member?
Facetiously, CJ
Half of the team flying one these thingies is a spotter per AMA rules, even though he has zip to do other than be a spectator since any malfunction on the part of the UAS, or control or video link, or the operator' gray matter will result a crash within milliseconds. Why shouldn't the spotter be allowed to belong the SIG without being an AMA member?
Facetiously, CJ
Mike
11-07-2016, 06:37 PM
#98
Sport my Friend , there is nothing wrong with either yours or my my opinions . You believe one thing and I believe the other , no biggie , it's reasons like that we have Polls & Votes in the first place , cause folks will usually take one side or the other and so a majority opinion is sought out . Hey Init,
Half of the team flying one these thingies is a spotter per AMA rules, even though he has zip to do other than be a spectator since any malfunction on the part of the UAS, or control or video link, or the operator' gray matter will result a crash within milliseconds. Why shouldn't the spotter be allowed to belong the SIG without being an AMA member?
Facetiously, CJ
Half of the team flying one these thingies is a spotter per AMA rules, even though he has zip to do other than be a spectator since any malfunction on the part of the UAS, or control or video link, or the operator' gray matter will result a crash within milliseconds. Why shouldn't the spotter be allowed to belong the SIG without being an AMA member?
Facetiously, CJ
Hey CJ , Ok my Friend , let's take a look at the flipside of a spotter having no AMA membership just as a point of friendly discussion & conversation . God forbid the FPV craft goes out of control and cuts someone's pinkie . The pinkie then becomes badly infected , gets gangrene , and gotta get amputated . The victim , now lacking a pinkie , sues , and since both the pilot & spotter are responsible for the flight both are named in the lawsuit (pinkiesuit ?) . And now is where the uglies start for the poor spotter because he don't own a home and has no homeowner's insurance , and not being an AMA member he ain't covered by the AMA either . A judgement is handed down against both operators but only one has AMA insurance to cover his end , so what happens to the end of the guy who doesn't have his (rear) end covered by having AMA insurance ?
In short , with regards to the spotter whose supposed to be able to save the flight after having been handed the TX by the FPV pilot , doesn't taking on that responsibility also make him responsible for the entire flight and indemnified to cover half of the flight's incurred legal damages should any ever arise ? And he's gonna take on that responsibility with no AMA insurance backing him ? Not this guy , no way no how would I ever leave my butt uncovered in such a situation .
Last edited by init4fun; 11-07-2016 at 06:40 PM.
11-07-2016, 06:48 PM
#99
11-07-2016, 08:21 PM
#100
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey CJ , Ok my Friend , let's take a look at the flipside of a spotter having no AMA membership just as a point of friendly discussion & conversation . God forbid the FPV craft goes out of control and cuts someone's pinkie . The pinkie then becomes badly infected , gets gangrene , and gotta get amputated . The victim , now lacking a pinkie , sues , and since both the pilot & spotter are responsible for the flight both are named in the lawsuit (pinkiesuit ?) . And now is where the uglies start for the poor spotter because he don't own a home and has no homeowner's insurance , and not being an AMA member he ain't covered by the AMA either . A judgement is handed down against both operators but only one has AMA insurance to cover his end , so what happens to the end of the guy who doesn't have his (rear) end covered by having AMA insurance ?
In short , with regards to the spotter whose supposed to be able to save the flight after having been handed the TX by the FPV pilot , doesn't taking on that responsibility also make him responsible for the entire flight and indemnified to cover half of the flight's incurred legal damages should any ever arise ? And he's gonna take on that responsibility with no AMA insurance backing him ? Not this guy , no way no how would I ever leave my butt uncovered in such a situation .
