Please accept my apology. First please define ".... we wanted..." Who are 'we'?

The question about no rules etc., was so far out that I considered it just a troll. I have frequently expressed my opposition to the knee-jerk rules so frequently placed into the Safety Code. I have been responsible for several changes, namely the first large RC Combat rules brought into focus by my DVP Sandy Frank. I led the fight and RCCA did the leg work to obtain a reasonable adjustment.
Many years ago I initiated the fight when AMA tried to remove member-to-member liability. Insane item, because what the "L" is liability for on the field if it does not protect against member-to-member?
I have been in the battles for many years. I lost a few too. Namely, returning Contest Directors to automatic Leader Member status.
OTOH, in this society I find it very difficult to accept that any adult could not be aware that ALL actions are subject to litigation, especially civil contracts. In litigation, there are TWO (or more) SIDES, each represented by an attorney/s, that may well be friends with each other, each arguing the case from a different view/perspective. Hold harmless agreements simply lay the groundwork that attention was called to an item, not that there can be no litigation.

So Tim, regardless of what the college professors tell you along with their Utopian liberals, there are no absolutes in this area. As Einstein answered about absolutes, "There are only two absolutes, the speed of light and change. Sometimes I wonder about the speed-of-light." (or at least words to that effect!!)

Horrible,
I find it real interesting how you work so hard in your vain attempts to put words in my mouth.

I am far from great, or wonderful, as your hero Dr. Frank will attest. But I do thank you for the complement.

You might consider that I did not say ALL were failures, YOU DID!

Mav, my CRM work is just fine. Or so I was told on my last ride.

NOW JIM, are you telling me that the red words >>>>>

"I have been involved with more than one start up operation where the CEO is convinced he knows more than any about everything. Those all seem to crash and burn badly...."

are NOT your words???

As I said JB, I am not a "confuser" whiz, and I have NOT a clue as to how to EDIT other people's posts here on RCU.

I nominated Hoss. Let the dart throwing commence!

Seems to me that the operative word was "where" and yet you seem to be unable to read that. Unless you are locked in to twisting whatever is said into whatever you want it to mean, just like every other left wing liberal.

Good luck, I will probably be campaigning for whoever runs against you.

Woody218-rcu, you fit in to this bunch just right, just like all us trouble makers[sm=biggrin.gif]

After having watched this and other AMA related threads, I am of the opinion that I have yet to encounter anyone I would actually vote for on any level. The bickering that is taking place here, as well as the goofy attempts to say "I didn't say that" or "yes you did and here is where." are just showing someone has far too much time on their hands.

This type of childish behavior does not further any cause, nor does it tend to give any side any credence.

So to wrap up...neener neener neener.

Liberator,

You have to keep in mind that this is a DISCUSSION forum. Jim attacks Horrace and calls him names; Horrace attempts to reason with him. I conclude that Jim is pursuing a vendetta. Up to you to to draw your own conclusion.

Regards,

CR

No vendetta Charley, I leave those to you and Dr. H. Sanford Frank as they seem to be a specialty of you folks do very well.

I ping on Horrible because more often than not his posts make little sense until one looks for the black helicopters...

Horrible's attempts at logic miss the mark when they are based on his inability to read or his eagerness to twist what was written into something entirely different. I do have to admit that his ability to do that never ceases to amaze me.

jim, in an earlier post, you spoke of an ama lawsuit threat against you? what was that all about? although i live in the houston area and probably met horace at event or two, i cant say i know him and i may have never met him, however he deserves a little more respect than to be called childish names as you call him. if you have issue with a stand he takes, you do not rally support by being so childish. just my 2 cents and probably not worth that. barry

Hoss, as in "we", I meant this...
<quote>[Now ET, you answer my post (#53) with again what YOU WANT! <quote>

You were asking ET what he wanted you to do for the AMA, and I chimed in on that accord. And for this:

<quote>The question about no rules etc., was so far out that I considered it just a troll. I have frequently expressed my opposition to the knee-jerk rules so frequently placed into the Safety Code. I have been responsible for several changes, namely the first large RC Combat rules brought into focus by my DVP Sandy Frank. I led the fight and RCCA did the leg work to obtain a reasonable adjustment. <quote>

Yes, that was a vague comment on my part, pardon me for being impatient while I type. I was referring to rule changes not as a knee jerk reaction to an incident, but moreso if somehow the AMA was changed not to be held accountable if somebody acts stupid and gets hurt/hurts somebody, etc.

A very good thought, however those in places far above me, and I suspect you, TIM, will have to change this USA's entire TORT system before that change can even be contemplated. In our society everyone and everything are each-and-all the targets for the litigators.

The best thing that an EVP can do is to maneuver AMA into making the insurance more like regular commercial insurance, without so many restrictions. OTOH that would drive the cost up. Like other good programs in this world, who finally gets the bill? Joe Workingclass!
Now if AMA's non-related business enterprises were forced into being profit centers for AMA, rather than my perception of nests for bureaucrats, then just maybe better insurance would be made available at LOWER cost to the member. These are the areas where as CFO, I wish to make changes and such can only be done through member intervention as they get the true stories. You have already read my post where I question if the current EVP/CFO wants to further restrict your access to information.
There is one of those "black helicopters" that JB likes to mention from time to time. Yes, I do find more information between the lines and what some do NOT say, rather than what they DO say.[8D] A very simple illustration: Many years ago, in my early 20s, I tried to campaign for an incumbent city Mayor even though he had raised city tax rates. The opposer kept promising, "No increase in tax rates on my watch." The new guy won big time. Within 6 months all properties were increased in valuation by a minimum of 50% and some to 100%. So the newbie got BIG TAX INCREASES. So very many just refused to understand the relationship between appraisals, tax rates, and actual tax $$.
Listen to the info being conveyed, compare it to what is NOT conveyed, and then evaluate the possibilities that exist. So why is Mr. Holland even considering withholding the audit report / financial statement from the membership?[:-]

Now that it has been brought up, I would like to know exactly how our dues are getting spent, you can see my post to your other thread that you started on the audit.

Tim

Hey what happened to ET ? I can't imagine that he would hide when the questions got tough. LOL I guess some things never change. LOL