Chatham Contest August 19th
08-14-2006, 06:12 PM
#51
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Windsor,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Mentor34
So Palmer........ What you're saying is that this scale event that was cancelled, was the original CAC event that MAAC wouldn't agree to endorse? If that's the case, then its sounds to me like a little UNDERHANDED dirty work of someone trying to disguise this CAC event under the CHATHAM AERONAUTS charter. I've never seen anything posted stating that it WAS NOT a MAAC event. As far as I've been led to believe, it was a MAAC chartered event being put on by the Chatham club and NOW you're saying that's not the case.
Secondly, how would you expect spectators to show up to see an airshow when you tell the pilots they can't come to perform for the spectators.
Seems to me like there would be a couple spectators sitting in lawn chairs looking at an empty sky, if they even showed up at all.........That really defeats the purpose of having an event if you're only gonna perform for the 3 of ya's...[sm=thumbdown.gif][sm=drowning.gif][sm=crying.gif]
ORIGINAL: Jabba
The CHATHAM SCALE is not a MAAC event. NO IF ANDS OR BUTTS about it.
MAAC did not take part in the planning, put up any $$$, put any work into the event.
It's a Chatham Aeronauts EVENT, they did all the work. BUT up all the money.
YOU were asked not to attend. BUT did not go with the WISHES of the CHATHAM CLUB.
then you wrote a letter (second year you done that) crying that you were not given any recognition.
WHY would they - the club did not want you at the even.
YOU keep putting your noise in Chatham Club business when they do not want your opinion.
The CHATHAM SCALE is not a MAAC event. NO IF ANDS OR BUTTS about it.
MAAC did not take part in the planning, put up any $$$, put any work into the event.
It's a Chatham Aeronauts EVENT, they did all the work. BUT up all the money.
YOU were asked not to attend. BUT did not go with the WISHES of the CHATHAM CLUB.
then you wrote a letter (second year you done that) crying that you were not given any recognition.
WHY would they - the club did not want you at the even.
YOU keep putting your noise in Chatham Club business when they do not want your opinion.
Secondly, how would you expect spectators to show up to see an airshow when you tell the pilots they can't come to perform for the spectators.
Seems to me like there would be a couple spectators sitting in lawn chairs looking at an empty sky, if they even showed up at all.........That really defeats the purpose of having an event if you're only gonna perform for the 3 of ya's...[sm=thumbdown.gif][sm=drowning.gif][sm=crying.gif]
NO there was NO UNDERHANDED dirty work.... the BOD and the ZD all new what was going on. I fact it was there idea.
To Change the name and get a different club to sponsor it. Which was done.
WHAT makes it a MAAC event?
Sure the MAAC NATS. is an MAAC event, it has there NAME in it.
NO the Chatham Scale or the Chatham Contest were NOT MAAC events. They had NOTHHING to do with either of them.
JUST like the SPRC event they are NOT MAAC events. MAAC does not put any $$$ into them or any work.
YOU do not need a MAAC Sanction to have an event.
ONLY to record MAAC records or FAI records.
If you wish you could have a Scale Contest and not even use MAAC rules. Just the they do in the US for TOP GUN and the US SCALE MASTERS, each have there own rules.
So now a club cannot inform a person(s) that they are not welcome at there field?
The Chatham Airport is a Chatham Aeronauts field, just like the Leamington Airport is a SPRC field.
Gee I think Patch has been asked to leave from several clubs.
It's just plan and simple: Dennis, John, and Chris are event CRASHERS. (maybe they will make a move about them).
They were asked by the club NOT to attend the event.
BUT then Rob if you ever CD a event you would know what your talking about.
Mentor34
Secondly, how would you expect spectators to show up to see an airshow when you tell the pilots they can't come to perform for the spectators.
Secondly, how would you expect spectators to show up to see an airshow when you tell the pilots they can't come to perform for the spectators.
Mentor34
MAAC chartered event:
MAAC chartered event:
Again you are showing you have never CD an event.
Clubs get Charters
Events if you wish can be SANCTIONED.
What does an event sanction get you other then in MAAC mag.
ALL MAAC members are covered by the MAAC insurance if they have the land owner OK. (this is what the insurance policy says – I’ve got a copy).
Palmer
08-14-2006, 07:34 PM
#52
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Applehoney
I feel that there must be some very childish minds amongst those in Chatham who choose to discriminate against others - no matter what the background reasons might be perceived as - and say ' It's our game, and you can't come and play with us'. Juvenile !
I feel that there must be some very childish minds amongst those in Chatham who choose to discriminate against others - no matter what the background reasons might be perceived as - and say ' It's our game, and you can't come and play with us'. Juvenile !
Dennis
08-14-2006, 08:00 PM
#53
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Windsor, ON, CANADA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
Palmer.... You know that I mean by chartered event, I mean that it's endorsed by MAAC and therefore covered by MAAC insurance.
If MAAC doesn't endorse it for whatever reason just like it didn't endorse CAC, it won't be covered by MAAC.
What I find amazing is that some of the same people that told the Southwest Zone NOT to fly because we didn't have insurance (CLAIMED THE INSURANCE POLICY WAS WORDED WRONG)
are some of the same people that are willing to fly and put on events without MAAC's endorsement and insurance coverage and still use the excuse that they have coverage at any time on any property with permission from the landowner..... Palmer... Even you know this is WAAAAYYYY TOOOOOO hypocritical. This WHOLE thing is based on the fact that somebody wanted to start their own "TOP GUN" in Canada and willing to do it at "ANY COST".
And it has COST alot. It has cost MAAC in legal fees. It has cost pilots lost flying time due to cancelled events. It has cost people putting money into events that get cancelled. It has cost the hobby a reputation and most of all, it has cost quite a few fliers some friendships.
Just because I haven't cd'd an event, doesn't mean that I don't know that MAAC is the governing body for Canada. I'm not trying to sidestep or circumvent any rules of MAAC. They set the policies and bylaws based on the motions passed at the AGM/AZM's with it's members best interest in mind. It's just a shame that others can't seem to follows those policies and bylaws and ruin it for everyone else.
Applehoney.............. I don't think it could have written any better. JUVINILE..PURE JUVINILE [:@][&o]
If MAAC doesn't endorse it for whatever reason just like it didn't endorse CAC, it won't be covered by MAAC.
What I find amazing is that some of the same people that told the Southwest Zone NOT to fly because we didn't have insurance (CLAIMED THE INSURANCE POLICY WAS WORDED WRONG)
are some of the same people that are willing to fly and put on events without MAAC's endorsement and insurance coverage and still use the excuse that they have coverage at any time on any property with permission from the landowner..... Palmer... Even you know this is WAAAAYYYY TOOOOOO hypocritical. This WHOLE thing is based on the fact that somebody wanted to start their own "TOP GUN" in Canada and willing to do it at "ANY COST".
And it has COST alot. It has cost MAAC in legal fees. It has cost pilots lost flying time due to cancelled events. It has cost people putting money into events that get cancelled. It has cost the hobby a reputation and most of all, it has cost quite a few fliers some friendships.
Just because I haven't cd'd an event, doesn't mean that I don't know that MAAC is the governing body for Canada. I'm not trying to sidestep or circumvent any rules of MAAC. They set the policies and bylaws based on the motions passed at the AGM/AZM's with it's members best interest in mind. It's just a shame that others can't seem to follows those policies and bylaws and ruin it for everyone else.
Applehoney.............. I don't think it could have written any better. JUVINILE..PURE JUVINILE [:@]
[&o]
08-14-2006, 08:04 PM
#54
Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ajax, ON, CANADA
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
>don't judge the Chatham Club by the Fried Few.
Dennis, I said 'some' .. I wouldn't think of judging the entire club by the actions of what is obviously a very small (and small minded) vocal and subversive minority. Sooner or later that majority will tire of having their club associated with these people and say 'enough is enough'...
Dennis, I said 'some' .. I wouldn't think of judging the entire club by the actions of what is obviously a very small (and small minded) vocal and subversive minority. Sooner or later that majority will tire of having their club associated with these people and say 'enough is enough'...
08-14-2006, 08:08 PM
#55
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Windsor,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Propworn
Applehoney don't judge the Chatham Club by the Fried Few. Consider that Palmer isn't even a member of the Chatham Club yet chooses to speak on the clubs behalf. All of us were made welcome by the president of the Chatham Club I don't understand the point of ranting and raving over an event that is now passed. It was a typical Chatham event and the club should be commended on a successful and fine event. If everyone were to ignore the Fried Few they might just go away. As long as you choose to debate with them they think they have an audience they can convince. Not only are they boring but predicable as well. Because a select few display a lack of class at any event it should not reflect on the club. I actually think their antics are pretty entertaining. Let’s ask them this HEY!!!! Haven’t you guys claimed, predicted, stated all kinds of things were going to happen, take place or affect MAAC and some of the members you don’t like? So name one of your silly rants or claims that have come to pass. CAN ANYONE ELSE THINK OF EVEN ONE?????? What is the intellect level age wise where the most intelligent thing one can come up with is NYA NYA NYA nobody likes ya!!!! I gota ask all of you is it worth arguing or debating this line of rational?????
Dennis
ORIGINAL: Applehoney
I feel that there must be some very childish minds amongst those in Chatham who choose to discriminate against others - no matter what the background reasons might be perceived as - and say ' It's our game, and you can't come and play with us'. Juvenile !
I feel that there must be some very childish minds amongst those in Chatham who choose to discriminate against others - no matter what the background reasons might be perceived as - and say ' It's our game, and you can't come and play with us'. Juvenile !
Dennis
Fried Few that is what your calling the Chatham club now. Again they as a club asked you not go CRASH the event.
Gee Dennis I've seen some email you sent to the Chatham Club were you stuck your noise in the Chatham Aeronauts CLUB BUSINESS without them wanting your involvement.
YOU seem to like RANTING and RAVING when it is about others..... but when it is about YOUR CRASHING a EVENTS it's a different story.
AGAIN you were ASKED by the Chatham Aeronauts NOT to attend there event. (NOT some ranting and raving few) BUT you just had the CRASH the EVENT.
Lets see, last year you cried because you did not get invited to a private party, after the NATS. Send the Chatham Club a letter and even getting MAAC involved, WHY was I not invited to the party. cry cry. Now you cry because they did not want you at there event. I wonder why?
1) cry about party
2) sticking your noise in Chatham Aeronauts business unvited.
3) crash there event
Great Manners!
08-14-2006, 08:33 PM
#56
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Windsor,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Mentor34
Palmer.... You know that I mean by chartered event, I mean that it's endorsed by MAAC and therefore covered by MAAC insurance.
If MAAC doesn't endorse it for whatever reason just like it didn't endorse CAC, it won't be covered by MAAC.
What I find amazing is that some of the same people that told the Southwest Zone NOT to fly because we didn't have insurance (CLAIMED THE INSURANCE POLICY WAS WORDED WRONG)
are some of the same people that are willing to fly and put on events without MAAC's endorsement and insurance coverage and still use the excuse that they have coverage at any time on any property with permission from the landowner..... Palmer... Even you know this is WAAAAYYYY TOOOOOO hypocritical. This WHOLE thing is based on the fact that somebody wanted to start their own "TOP GUN" in Canada and willing to do it at "ANY COST".
And it has COST alot. It has cost MAAC in legal fees. It has cost pilots lost flying time due to cancelled events. It has cost people putting money into events that get cancelled. It has cost the hobby a reputation and most of all, it has cost quite a few fliers some friendships.
Just because I haven't cd'd an event, doesn't mean that I don't know that MAAC is the governing body for Canada. I'm not trying to sidestep or circumvent any rules of MAAC. They set the policies and bylaws based on the motions passed at the AGM/AZM's with it's members best interest in mind. It's just a shame that others can't seem to follows those policies and bylaws and ruin it for everyone else.
Applehoney.............. I don't think it could have written any better. JUVINILE..PURE JUVINILE [:@][&o]
Palmer.... You know that I mean by chartered event, I mean that it's endorsed by MAAC and therefore covered by MAAC insurance.
If MAAC doesn't endorse it for whatever reason just like it didn't endorse CAC, it won't be covered by MAAC.
What I find amazing is that some of the same people that told the Southwest Zone NOT to fly because we didn't have insurance (CLAIMED THE INSURANCE POLICY WAS WORDED WRONG)
are some of the same people that are willing to fly and put on events without MAAC's endorsement and insurance coverage and still use the excuse that they have coverage at any time on any property with permission from the landowner..... Palmer... Even you know this is WAAAAYYYY TOOOOOO hypocritical. This WHOLE thing is based on the fact that somebody wanted to start their own "TOP GUN" in Canada and willing to do it at "ANY COST".
And it has COST alot. It has cost MAAC in legal fees. It has cost pilots lost flying time due to cancelled events. It has cost people putting money into events that get cancelled. It has cost the hobby a reputation and most of all, it has cost quite a few fliers some friendships.
Just because I haven't cd'd an event, doesn't mean that I don't know that MAAC is the governing body for Canada. I'm not trying to sidestep or circumvent any rules of MAAC. They set the policies and bylaws based on the motions passed at the AGM/AZM's with it's members best interest in mind. It's just a shame that others can't seem to follows those policies and bylaws and ruin it for everyone else.
Applehoney.............. I don't think it could have written any better. JUVINILE..PURE JUVINILE [:@]
[&o]
IF a MAAC member has the OK of the land owner they are covered by the insurance.
Hundred of MAAC members do not belong to a CLUB, but they fly and have MAAC insurance because they have to land owner permission
So if I have the land owner permission, and I'm a MAAC member should MAAC be able to say NO you cannot fly today because we do not want you to fly today?
Thats what they did with the CAC event. All the pilot that would have showed up would have been MAAC members, they would have had the land owner permission to fly at that site. BUT because MAAC had a problem with the people running the event they said NO you cannot fly there. TAKING AWAY the MEMBERS rights.
WORDED WRONG is what we are talking about. The policy said that ONLY MAAC SANCTIONED EVENTS were covered. So every day flying would not be covered. So they had the wording changed.
MAAC is not the ONLY insurance policy in the World. YOU can buy insurance add ons to your home owner that will cover you hobby.
So whats the problem with having a Canadian Top Gun?
Does anyone else see a problem with this?
MAAC legal fees - to check the insurance (good money spent).
they said Chuck was sueing them. Well not totally true, they received a letter just like Dennis, John, and Chris stating IF they did not stop defaming Chuck he would sue.
All they had to do is STOP.
Rob I think I've done MORE work for MAAC then you have.
YOU run off at the mouth and have very little FACTS.... or just half truths.
08-14-2006, 08:43 PM
#57
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Windsor, ON, CANADA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
Palmer. You are willfully admitting that the club is trying to put these CAC events on under different names and clubs just to use MAAC insurance coverage. CAC is "DEAD". I don't understand why you're trying to revive CAC under assumed names. It's still the SAME OL' players trying to accomplish the same goal.... You can shave the fur off a skunk, but that sac still proves it's a skunk.
No matter what, you still have to follow MAAC guidelines to get MAAC benefits., so why wouldn't you go back to the original way of doing things and make it work. It's gone way too far and "it's time to eat a little crow"...............just admit it.
No matter what, you still have to follow MAAC guidelines to get MAAC benefits., so why wouldn't you go back to the original way of doing things and make it work. It's gone way too far and "it's time to eat a little crow"...............just admit it.
08-14-2006, 09:36 PM
#58
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Windsor, ON, CANADA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Jabba
See there your problem. The Chatham club VOTED on these people not attending.
Again they new they were not welcome at the event but came anyway. Talk about bad manners.
I'm Dennis Pratt and I'm coming weather you like it or NOT.
So much for respecting the Chatham Club, no wonder they completely ignored you.
See there your problem. The Chatham club VOTED on these people not attending.
Again they new they were not welcome at the event but came anyway. Talk about bad manners.
I'm Dennis Pratt and I'm coming weather you like it or NOT.
So much for respecting the Chatham Club, no wonder they completely ignored you.
Palmer. I don't believe that the WHOLE Chatham club voted to have these guys banned. I'll bet that the ones that voted were the "SELECT FRIED FEW " as it's called. Were you there to see the WHOLE Chatham club vote against Dennis, John and Chris or is that what you were told happened?
08-14-2006, 09:53 PM
#59
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: WELLAND,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: jhelps
A hobby with 10,000 plus members is enough of a cross section of society to have every kind of individual in it including egotists. While it is easy to say "let's just fly" unfortunately to allow you to do that means someone (or in this case a bunch of someones) need to take care of the 3/4 million budget and arrange insurance,etc. Politics in the most negative sense of the word is bound to happen. Pretending it can be avoided by simply going flying is IMHO leaving the dirty work up to others.
A hobby with 10,000 plus members is enough of a cross section of society to have every kind of individual in it including egotists. While it is easy to say "let's just fly" unfortunately to allow you to do that means someone (or in this case a bunch of someones) need to take care of the 3/4 million budget and arrange insurance,etc. Politics in the most negative sense of the word is bound to happen. Pretending it can be avoided by simply going flying is IMHO leaving the dirty work up to others.
Do i benefit from the work all these people have done. Yes i do. I also "PAY" for these privileges. And no i am not complaining about the cost of Maac. I find it another cost of the hobby, kinda like glow fuel or servos.
08-14-2006, 10:00 PM
#60
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Windsor,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Mentor34
Palmer. You are willfully admitting that the club is trying to put these CAC events on under different names and clubs just to use MAAC insurance coverage. CAC is "DEAD". I don't understand why you're trying to revive CAC under assumed names. It's still the SAME OL' players trying to accomplish the same goal.... You can shave the fur off a skunk, but that sac still proves it's a skunk.
No matter what, you still have to follow MAAC guidelines to get MAAC benefits., so why wouldn't you go back to the original way of doing things and make it work. It's gone way too far and "it's time to eat a little crow"...............just admit it.
Palmer. You are willfully admitting that the club is trying to put these CAC events on under different names and clubs just to use MAAC insurance coverage. CAC is "DEAD". I don't understand why you're trying to revive CAC under assumed names. It's still the SAME OL' players trying to accomplish the same goal.... You can shave the fur off a skunk, but that sac still proves it's a skunk.
No matter what, you still have to follow MAAC guidelines to get MAAC benefits., so why wouldn't you go back to the original way of doing things and make it work. It's gone way too far and "it's time to eat a little crow"...............just admit it.
AGAIN Rob:
MAAC knew the CAC event was changed to a Chatham Contest.... as did the ZD and supported it, and sanction it!!!
The CAC is NOT dead it is STILL a CLUB not a MAAC CLUB but still a club. (membership still growing)
What's the problem with the CAC?
All it wanted was to have a contest around the same time and place each year.
Would that not be NICE?
MAAC could still have all the event it wanted to, if they could find people, and a place to run them. The more events I would think the BETTER?
WHAT MAAC guidelines were not followed?
The CAC tried to become a MAAC club - they even have the paperwork to prove it.
THE ONLY reason MAAC gave the CAC as to WHY they were not a MAAC club was because they had the word CANADIAN in there name.
WHAT have I done that I need to eat CROW over?
Help to form a NEW CLUB that wanted to have ONE event a year to promote modeling. So your saying thats a BAD thing?
MAAC did not approve the CAC, ok thats done. So the event should die too. OR wait you get the OK from MAAC change the name and get a club to run it and they will ok it.
THAT was done!!!! MAAC SANCTIONED the CHATHAM CONTEST, and they new what was happening.
Like any event IF it happen MAAC saftey rules would have been followed (thats part of getting the insurance coverage)
Now the even has been CANCELLED.....(because of LACK of pilots)
NOW no MAAC members will have a chance to WIN a chance to attend Top Gun, or the US Scale Masters. Does that make you happy Rob?
BUT then Rob you never attended TOP GUN so you have no idea what MAAC members are missing out of.
All the MAAC members I recommend last year (because of were they finished) will I sure get invited back.
I've talked to them all and boy do they want to go back again.
So not having a event to QUALIFIER for TOP GUN or the US SCALE MASTER thats a good thing, is that what your saying?
As far as using MAAC insurance policy.... is that NOT why we by the insurance.
Again Rob read the policy. The insurance is to cover the MEMBERSHIP when flying or taking part in the hobby.
IF I can not use the insurance why would I belong to MAAC?
I've worked HARD to get MAAC members a change to compete at TOP GUN, and your saying I should eat crow for doing that?
AGAIN WHY will not MAAC or the BOD sit down with these peopel and talk it out. It has been asked of the BOD at least 20 times.... we get NO answer. WHY?
Should not the BOD when asked by members have to meeting with them, sit down and talk out these issues?
MAAC is a group that is run by the membership.
the membership elect a ZD to be THERE REP.
the ZD sits on the BOD
the BOD tells the executive how to run MAAC
the EXE. cares out the BOD decisions.
the Executive is suppose to do what the membership wants not the other way around.
OUR President is really more like the chairman of the board, NOT a president.
[&o][:'(]
08-14-2006, 10:19 PM
#61
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Windsor,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Mentor34
Palmer. I don't believe that the WHOLE Chatham club voted to have these guys banned. I'll bet that the ones that voted were the "SELECT FRIED FEW " as it's called. Were you there to see the WHOLE Chatham club vote against Dennis, John and Chris or is that what you were told happened?
ORIGINAL: Jabba
See there your problem. The Chatham club VOTED on these people not attending.
Again they new they were not welcome at the event but came anyway. Talk about bad manners.
I'm Dennis Pratt and I'm coming weather you like it or NOT.
So much for respecting the Chatham Club, no wonder they completely ignored you.
See there your problem. The Chatham club VOTED on these people not attending.
Again they new they were not welcome at the event but came anyway. Talk about bad manners.
I'm Dennis Pratt and I'm coming weather you like it or NOT.
So much for respecting the Chatham Club, no wonder they completely ignored you.
Palmer. I don't believe that the WHOLE Chatham club voted to have these guys banned. I'll bet that the ones that voted were the "SELECT FRIED FEW " as it's called. Were you there to see the WHOLE Chatham club vote against Dennis, John and Chris or is that what you were told happened?
my question to you would now be:
were you there to here that they did not vote to ban these guys.
AGIAN.... Dennis has stuck his noise in Chatham business when NOT asked. HOW that club is run is NOT his business. WHAT they decide is NOT HIS business.
I think if YOUR club did not want someone to show up at there events or even join YOUR club. THAT should be the clubs decision.
AGAIN you keep call the member of the CAC a bad group of people.
But when some one ask who is going to run the next NATS. LOTS will say the SW Zone they do a GREAT JOB.
That the funny part, you see 90% of the committee that ran the 2005 NATS and did that GREAT JOB are all CAC members. (plus lots of others now)
So on one hand you call use name and we are the dirt of the earth.
Then you want us to run the next NATS.
YOU call the CAC members bad names and you do not even know who most of them are.
So you do not like me.... thats your right, but your going to paint the rest of the membership of the CAC with the same brush.
What did the CAC do to YOU?
AGAIN all I know the CAC wanted to do is run ONE event a year.
They would not have a normal flying field, or hold monthly meetings.
JUST put together ONE EVENT a YEAR, and contest but I guess thats wrong!!! HEAVEN knows without the work of these people MAAC may never see another NATS.
NO one else in MAAC got a NATS together for 2006, and I do not see one coming for 2007 or when?
Dennis is Scale chairman will he have a NATS next year. I hope so, but most of the people that WORK these events he has pissed off, and will have NOTHING to do with him.
Again I wish him luck he is going to need it.
08-14-2006, 10:30 PM
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Headingley, MB, CANADA
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: HangmaN187
As far as leaving the dirty work to others.. Yup i have no problem with that.. i am not angry when every person i know does not get involved with my special interests. I donate a lot of time to other charities and do a lot for my club and my city. I never have done this for thanks of any kind. The time i give is of my choice and i am not looking for a reward or recognition.
Do i benefit from the work all these people have done. Yes i do. I also "PAY" for these privileges. And no i am not complaining about the cost of Maac. I find it another cost of the hobby, kinda like glow fuel or servos.
ORIGINAL: jhelps
A hobby with 10,000 plus members is enough of a cross section of society to have every kind of individual in it including egotists. While it is easy to say "let's just fly" unfortunately to allow you to do that means someone (or in this case a bunch of someones) need to take care of the 3/4 million budget and arrange insurance,etc. Politics in the most negative sense of the word is bound to happen. Pretending it can be avoided by simply going flying is IMHO leaving the dirty work up to others.
A hobby with 10,000 plus members is enough of a cross section of society to have every kind of individual in it including egotists. While it is easy to say "let's just fly" unfortunately to allow you to do that means someone (or in this case a bunch of someones) need to take care of the 3/4 million budget and arrange insurance,etc. Politics in the most negative sense of the word is bound to happen. Pretending it can be avoided by simply going flying is IMHO leaving the dirty work up to others.
Do i benefit from the work all these people have done. Yes i do. I also "PAY" for these privileges. And no i am not complaining about the cost of Maac. I find it another cost of the hobby, kinda like glow fuel or servos.
Jeff
08-15-2006, 09:34 AM
#63
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Jabba
Dennis is Scale chairman will he have a NATS next year.
Dennis is Scale chairman will he have a NATS next year.
Dennis
08-15-2006, 10:12 AM
#64
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Windsor,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Propworn
My recollection is that it was Jerry Shaw when he was ZD who was the organizer of any of the Nats I can remember. In fact when Chuck was the ZD it still was Gerry Shaw as the one who was responsible for the Nats not Chuck (remember you are the one who pointed that out on numerous occasions). Or perhaps we have been flim flammed again with the Fried Fews wondrous shift the name, shift the blame game. I don't ever remember reading anywhere in the guidelines that organizing the NATS was part of any Chairman’s job description so why would it now all the sudden be mine. Because Jabba the great said so? Palmer say what you want you change directions and positions more times than one changes ones socks. I think the AZM will tell the tale and all the yipping here on this forum is mostly a place for you to vent in disappointment. You’re beginning to sound like a broken record or one that’s stuck on skip. You have a banner day big guy I know I am.
Dennis
ORIGINAL: Jabba
Dennis is Scale chairman will he have a NATS next year.
Dennis is Scale chairman will he have a NATS next year.
Dennis
OK so now you take my word that CHUCK was not in charge of the 2005 NATS. As you said Gerry was the NAT's CD and committee chairman. CHUCK was not event the ZD when the 2005 NATS took part. THEN WHY is MAAC blaming HIM over the $$$. ANY flim flamming I guess would have comed from you, as you several times have blamed Chuck for the NATS.
YOUR right Dennis the chairman's job descripton does not say he/she has to run NATS. And I did not say that either (see below).
I ASKED as question...... are you going to have NATS next year? Then said "I hope so" and wished you luck.
from Palmer
Dennis is Scale chairman will he have a NATS next year. I hope so, but most of the people that WORK these events he has pissed off, and will have NOTHING to do with him.
Again I wish him luck he is going to need it.
Dennis is Scale chairman will he have a NATS next year. I hope so, but most of the people that WORK these events he has pissed off, and will have NOTHING to do with him.
Again I wish him luck he is going to need it.
08-15-2006, 11:00 AM
#65
Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Calgary,
AB, CANADA
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Jabba
NOW no MAAC members will have a chance to WIN a chance to attend Top Gun, or the US Scale Masters.
NOW no MAAC members will have a chance to WIN a chance to attend Top Gun, or the US Scale Masters.
08-15-2006, 11:45 AM
#66
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Windsor, ON, CANADA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Jabba
AGAIN Rob:
MAAC knew the CAC event was changed to a Chatham Contest.... as did the ZD and supported it, and sanction it!!!
The CAC is NOT dead it is STILL a CLUB not a MAAC CLUB but still a club. (membership still growing)
What's the problem with the CAC?
It's not a MAAC sanctioned club. It doesn't have all the benefits that can be offered through another club because it doesn't have MAAC's endorsement
All it wanted was to have a contest around the same time and place each year.
Would that not be NICE?
MAAC could still have all the event it wanted to, if they could find people, and a place to run them. The more events I would think the BETTER?
We had an event like that scheduled remember?... It was called the Nat's and many pilots were looking forward to it. It was canceled at the very last minute and low and behold moments later.......an announcement was being made that CAC was formed and it was now gonna put on a scale event at the same time as the origninal NAT's. What was amazing is the fact that same people that canceled the NATS claiming there wasn't enough time are the very same people that said they would put on the CAC scale event in the exact time frame............ Hey Palmer. Do you smell CARP cuz I think it smell very fishy in here.
WHAT MAAC guidelines were not followed?
The CAC tried to become a MAAC club - they even have the paperwork to prove it.
THE ONLY reason MAAC gave the CAC as to WHY they were not a MAAC club was because they had the word CANADIAN in there name.
I'm sure if we were to ask the MAAC BOD, They would tell us a whole different story of more than only ONE issue with CAC
WHAT have I done that I need to eat CROW over?
Help to form a NEW CLUB that wanted to have ONE event a year to promote modeling. So your saying thats a BAD thing?
The bad part is that any club could have done the event and the event was already scheduled to happen. CAC didn't need to be formed to have the event. Conveniently the NAT's were canceled to facilitate someone's personal goal to have control of their very own event.
MAAC did not approve the CAC, ok thats done. So the event should die too. OR wait you get the OK from MAAC change the name and get a club to run it and they will ok it.
THAT was done!!!! MAAC SANCTIONED the CHATHAM CONTEST, and they new what was happening.
Make up your mind Palmer...... You and CLIFF have already stated " NO IF ANDS OR BUTTS" MAAC had nothing to do with EITHER contest... Quite contradictory again
Like any event IF it happen MAAC saftey rules would have been followed (thats part of getting the insurance coverage)
You don't get it do ya Palmer? You can't claim MAAC insurance coverage for an event that MAAC don't endorse....It's not covered. Just because you're a MAAC member, doesn't mean you still get to use the insurance. There's rules to follow.
Just like you have car insurance... You know you're not allowed to drink and drive. That's the insurance company rule. Smack up that car and watch how quick the insurance BAILS on your claim. MAAC has insurance for us to use but we also have to honour the rules and policies. You guys think that sidestepping the bylaws is still gonna force the insurance company pay a CAC claim through MAAC when it it happens???? Palmer. You can't be that DUMB?
Now the even has been CANCELLED.....(because of LACK of pilots)
NOW no MAAC members will have a chance to WIN a chance to attend Top Gun, or the US Scale Masters. Does that make you happy Rob?
No Palmer it does't make me happy. But then again there was a NAT'S already scheduled to happen but notice again..........IT WAS CONVENIENTLY CANCELED.
BUT then Rob you never attended TOP GUN so you have no idea what MAAC members are missing out of.
No Palmer I haven't. Unfortunately I don't have the luxury. time, money or experience to be in a TOP GUN event. Remember I'm fairly new to this hobby. I guess that's what makes you think you're better than us LESSER folk. Besides Palmer, other people who may be qualified to fly at TOP GUN are being denied the chance to fly because YOU and the FRIED FEW don't like them. An example of putting personal feelings in the way of what's right for the hobby. Feel like the BIG MAN on campus now Palmer?
All the MAAC members I recommend last year (because of were they finished) will I sure get invited back.
I've talked to them all and boy do they want to go back again.
Ohhhhhh I see it now... Palmer is the Canadian spokesman for Frank Tiano and you have to HOB-NOBBLE with Palmer Johnson and the FRIED FEW to be ALLOWED (at their descretion of course) to have the honor to rub elbows with Frank Tiano. Does Frank ask you for you permission to go to the bathroom too Palmer?
So not having a event to QUALIFIER for TOP GUN or the US SCALE MASTER thats a good thing, is that what your saying?
No Palmer.. Not at all. Read above. We had that event scheduled. Even B.C and Alberta tendered for it. But as stated the ones who somehow couldn't do it as the S/W Zone suddenly find the way of doing it as CAC.... That Carp is really starting to rot.
As far as using MAAC insurance policy.... is that NOT why we by the insurance.
Again Rob read the policy. The insurance is to cover the MEMBERSHIP when flying or taking part in the hobby.
IF I can not use the insurance why would I belong to MAAC?
The problem Palmer is that even you know that this tactic is a CHEAP way of trying to sidestep the bylaws. The clause for being allowed MAAC insurance while flying with permission from the landowner was created for one soul purpose. The INTENT of that was to allow people in rural areas to qualify for MAAC insurance as members when they couldn't muster up enough people in the area to qualify for a club sanction. You must have 5 or more members to become a MAAC chartered club. What you're trying is a pure abuse of the clause.
I've worked HARD to get MAAC members a change to compete at TOP GUN, and your saying I should eat crow for doing that?
No. I'm saying that this CAC b.s. has been a scam since before the 2002 Worlds. I don't agree with any part of. It's all about someone's personal dream to become the Canadian FRANK TIANO at any expense, and it has cost this hobby plenty........
It has cost MAAC defense fees for frivilous suits, it has cost member chances to fly/qualify for other contests, it has cost members money (ACCORDING TO CLIFF $200 of his own money) spent on events only to be canceled, it has cost this hobby a severe damaged reputation and and more than anything, it has cost this hobby alot of damaged friendships.
Does that make YOU happy Palmer. It must because it really seems there's no way you guys wanna stop with this B.S. with all the damage done now.
AGAIN WHY will not MAAC or the BOD sit down with these peopel and talk it out. It has been asked of the BOD at least 20 times.... we get NO answer. WHY?
Should not the BOD when asked by members have to meeting with them, sit down and talk out these issues?
If it was up to me, I would ask the group to meet the requirements for MAAC before I would discuss anything.....OOOOPSSS sorry. I think that was already done...
MAAC is a group that is run by the membership.
No Palmer. Actually MAAC is run by the BOARD OF DIRECTORS/EXECUTIVE that WE ALL elected to act in our behalf for all our best interests. Not just the interests of the select few.
the membership elect a ZD to be THERE REP.
the ZD sits on the BOD
the BOD tells the executive how to run MAAC
the EXE. cares out the BOD decisions.
the Executive is suppose to do what the membership wants not the other way around.
Yes to a point, but since the BOD has ALL the inside details, sometimes the BOD can't always do things exactly as the membership wants. They can't please every single member of MAAC. They have to do what is best for the majority of the membership
OUR President is really more like the chairman of the board, NOT a president.
That's YOUR opinion....Don't speak on my behalf.
AGAIN Rob:
MAAC knew the CAC event was changed to a Chatham Contest.... as did the ZD and supported it, and sanction it!!!
The CAC is NOT dead it is STILL a CLUB not a MAAC CLUB but still a club. (membership still growing)
What's the problem with the CAC?
It's not a MAAC sanctioned club. It doesn't have all the benefits that can be offered through another club because it doesn't have MAAC's endorsement
All it wanted was to have a contest around the same time and place each year.
Would that not be NICE?
MAAC could still have all the event it wanted to, if they could find people, and a place to run them. The more events I would think the BETTER?
We had an event like that scheduled remember?... It was called the Nat's and many pilots were looking forward to it. It was canceled at the very last minute and low and behold moments later.......an announcement was being made that CAC was formed and it was now gonna put on a scale event at the same time as the origninal NAT's. What was amazing is the fact that same people that canceled the NATS claiming there wasn't enough time are the very same people that said they would put on the CAC scale event in the exact time frame............ Hey Palmer. Do you smell CARP cuz I think it smell very fishy in here.
WHAT MAAC guidelines were not followed?
The CAC tried to become a MAAC club - they even have the paperwork to prove it.
THE ONLY reason MAAC gave the CAC as to WHY they were not a MAAC club was because they had the word CANADIAN in there name.
I'm sure if we were to ask the MAAC BOD, They would tell us a whole different story of more than only ONE issue with CAC
WHAT have I done that I need to eat CROW over?
Help to form a NEW CLUB that wanted to have ONE event a year to promote modeling. So your saying thats a BAD thing?
The bad part is that any club could have done the event and the event was already scheduled to happen. CAC didn't need to be formed to have the event. Conveniently the NAT's were canceled to facilitate someone's personal goal to have control of their very own event.
MAAC did not approve the CAC, ok thats done. So the event should die too. OR wait you get the OK from MAAC change the name and get a club to run it and they will ok it.
THAT was done!!!! MAAC SANCTIONED the CHATHAM CONTEST, and they new what was happening.
Make up your mind Palmer...... You and CLIFF have already stated " NO IF ANDS OR BUTTS" MAAC had nothing to do with EITHER contest... Quite contradictory again
Like any event IF it happen MAAC saftey rules would have been followed (thats part of getting the insurance coverage)
You don't get it do ya Palmer? You can't claim MAAC insurance coverage for an event that MAAC don't endorse....It's not covered. Just because you're a MAAC member, doesn't mean you still get to use the insurance. There's rules to follow.
Just like you have car insurance... You know you're not allowed to drink and drive. That's the insurance company rule. Smack up that car and watch how quick the insurance BAILS on your claim. MAAC has insurance for us to use but we also have to honour the rules and policies. You guys think that sidestepping the bylaws is still gonna force the insurance company pay a CAC claim through MAAC when it it happens???? Palmer. You can't be that DUMB?
Now the even has been CANCELLED.....(because of LACK of pilots)
NOW no MAAC members will have a chance to WIN a chance to attend Top Gun, or the US Scale Masters. Does that make you happy Rob?
No Palmer it does't make me happy. But then again there was a NAT'S already scheduled to happen but notice again..........IT WAS CONVENIENTLY CANCELED.
BUT then Rob you never attended TOP GUN so you have no idea what MAAC members are missing out of.
No Palmer I haven't. Unfortunately I don't have the luxury. time, money or experience to be in a TOP GUN event. Remember I'm fairly new to this hobby. I guess that's what makes you think you're better than us LESSER folk. Besides Palmer, other people who may be qualified to fly at TOP GUN are being denied the chance to fly because YOU and the FRIED FEW don't like them. An example of putting personal feelings in the way of what's right for the hobby. Feel like the BIG MAN on campus now Palmer?
All the MAAC members I recommend last year (because of were they finished) will I sure get invited back.
I've talked to them all and boy do they want to go back again.
Ohhhhhh I see it now... Palmer is the Canadian spokesman for Frank Tiano and you have to HOB-NOBBLE with Palmer Johnson and the FRIED FEW to be ALLOWED (at their descretion of course) to have the honor to rub elbows with Frank Tiano. Does Frank ask you for you permission to go to the bathroom too Palmer?
So not having a event to QUALIFIER for TOP GUN or the US SCALE MASTER thats a good thing, is that what your saying?
No Palmer.. Not at all. Read above. We had that event scheduled. Even B.C and Alberta tendered for it. But as stated the ones who somehow couldn't do it as the S/W Zone suddenly find the way of doing it as CAC.... That Carp is really starting to rot.
As far as using MAAC insurance policy.... is that NOT why we by the insurance.
Again Rob read the policy. The insurance is to cover the MEMBERSHIP when flying or taking part in the hobby.
IF I can not use the insurance why would I belong to MAAC?
The problem Palmer is that even you know that this tactic is a CHEAP way of trying to sidestep the bylaws. The clause for being allowed MAAC insurance while flying with permission from the landowner was created for one soul purpose. The INTENT of that was to allow people in rural areas to qualify for MAAC insurance as members when they couldn't muster up enough people in the area to qualify for a club sanction. You must have 5 or more members to become a MAAC chartered club. What you're trying is a pure abuse of the clause.
I've worked HARD to get MAAC members a change to compete at TOP GUN, and your saying I should eat crow for doing that?
No. I'm saying that this CAC b.s. has been a scam since before the 2002 Worlds. I don't agree with any part of. It's all about someone's personal dream to become the Canadian FRANK TIANO at any expense, and it has cost this hobby plenty........
It has cost MAAC defense fees for frivilous suits, it has cost member chances to fly/qualify for other contests, it has cost members money (ACCORDING TO CLIFF $200 of his own money) spent on events only to be canceled, it has cost this hobby a severe damaged reputation and and more than anything, it has cost this hobby alot of damaged friendships.
Does that make YOU happy Palmer. It must because it really seems there's no way you guys wanna stop with this B.S. with all the damage done now.
AGAIN WHY will not MAAC or the BOD sit down with these peopel and talk it out. It has been asked of the BOD at least 20 times.... we get NO answer. WHY?
Should not the BOD when asked by members have to meeting with them, sit down and talk out these issues?
If it was up to me, I would ask the group to meet the requirements for MAAC before I would discuss anything.....OOOOPSSS sorry. I think that was already done...
MAAC is a group that is run by the membership.
No Palmer. Actually MAAC is run by the BOARD OF DIRECTORS/EXECUTIVE that WE ALL elected to act in our behalf for all our best interests. Not just the interests of the select few.
the membership elect a ZD to be THERE REP.
the ZD sits on the BOD
the BOD tells the executive how to run MAAC
the EXE. cares out the BOD decisions.
the Executive is suppose to do what the membership wants not the other way around.
Yes to a point, but since the BOD has ALL the inside details, sometimes the BOD can't always do things exactly as the membership wants. They can't please every single member of MAAC. They have to do what is best for the majority of the membership
OUR President is really more like the chairman of the board, NOT a president.
That's YOUR opinion....Don't speak on my behalf.
08-15-2006, 12:29 PM
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: tecumseh,
ON,
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
I have a hard time believing that the Chatham club would vote to ask other MAAC member not to attend an event. There are a bunch of great people there. I know our club would welcome any MAAC(or AMA) member to any event or just to share our field with(even these few). Every Chatham member(other than these few) gave every visiting pilot top notch respect and courtesy.
I wonder if there are minutes from the club meeting for this vote? Was there really a vote by the club membership?
This sounds too petty for any club to do.
I wonder if there are minutes from the club meeting for this vote? Was there really a vote by the club membership?
This sounds too petty for any club to do.
08-15-2006, 12:35 PM
#68
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: tecumseh,
ON,
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
I think if YOUR club did not want someone to show up at there events or even join YOUR club. THAT should be the clubs decision.
That is not the attitude I would expect from anyone running for a MAAC position. Every member in good standing should be welcome at any event if they fly safely.
08-15-2006, 12:36 PM
#69
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Windsor,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
The CAC is NOT dead it is STILL a CLUB not a MAAC CLUB but still a club. (membership still growing)
What's the problem with the CAC?
It's not a MAAC sanctioned club
Again CLUB's are not sanctioned they are CLUB AFFILIATES. Other then that yes your right at this time the CAC is not a MAAC Affilated club. BUT it is a CLUB.
We had an event like that scheduled remember?... It was called the Nat's and many pilots were looking forward to it. It was cancelled at the very last minute and low and behold moments later.......an announcement was being made that CAC was formed and it was now gonna put on a scale event at the same time as the origninal NAT's. What was amazing is the fact that same people that cancelled the NATS claiming therewasn't enough time are the very same people that said they would on the CAC scale event in the exact time frame............ Hey Palmer. Do you smell CARP cuz I think it smell very fishy in here.
Where do you get the "WE HAD AN EVENT like that scheduled remember?
YOU were not involved!!!
NO the event was NEVER scheduled the committee formed (same group as 2005) but MAAC did not accept the committee's Proposal, they made some changes in it. Which they MAAC has right to do.
The committee "as a committee" decided NOT to accept the changes. Which I would say they have the right to do.
Next this was NOT done at the last minute. The committee said no at the end of the dead line which was Nov. 31 (I think) around there anyway.
There was still 8 months until the event was to be scheduled, LOTS of time.
Your next statement about the CAC being form is correct. BUT you statement that the committee cancelled the NATS because there was NOT enough time is WRONG. THAT is not why the committee cancelled.
AGAIN ROB your FACTS are wrong.
So what is WRONG with forming a NEW CLUB to run a event?
This NEW club wanted to run a event that would be like that NATS. (but ONLY MAAC can have NATIONALS) it was NOT being called MAAC NATIONALS or event the CAC NATIONALS.
MAAC could STILL have nationals.
Would it not be NICE to have several (two or more) events like this a year.
You should also remember that the MAAC Nationals move around the country.
This event would be again at the same place and time each year.
IF you smell CARP - I would tell you to take a bath.
What's the problem with the CAC?
It's not a MAAC sanctioned club
Again CLUB's are not sanctioned they are CLUB AFFILIATES. Other then that yes your right at this time the CAC is not a MAAC Affilated club. BUT it is a CLUB.
We had an event like that scheduled remember?... It was called the Nat's and many pilots were looking forward to it. It was cancelled at the very last minute and low and behold moments later.......an announcement was being made that CAC was formed and it was now gonna put on a scale event at the same time as the origninal NAT's. What was amazing is the fact that same people that cancelled the NATS claiming therewasn't enough time are the very same people that said they would on the CAC scale event in the exact time frame............ Hey Palmer. Do you smell CARP cuz I think it smell very fishy in here.
Where do you get the "WE HAD AN EVENT like that scheduled remember?
YOU were not involved!!!
NO the event was NEVER scheduled the committee formed (same group as 2005) but MAAC did not accept the committee's Proposal, they made some changes in it. Which they MAAC has right to do.
The committee "as a committee" decided NOT to accept the changes. Which I would say they have the right to do.
Next this was NOT done at the last minute. The committee said no at the end of the dead line which was Nov. 31 (I think) around there anyway.
There was still 8 months until the event was to be scheduled, LOTS of time.
Your next statement about the CAC being form is correct. BUT you statement that the committee cancelled the NATS because there was NOT enough time is WRONG. THAT is not why the committee cancelled.
AGAIN ROB your FACTS are wrong.
So what is WRONG with forming a NEW CLUB to run a event?
This NEW club wanted to run a event that would be like that NATS. (but ONLY MAAC can have NATIONALS) it was NOT being called MAAC NATIONALS or event the CAC NATIONALS.
MAAC could STILL have nationals.
Would it not be NICE to have several (two or more) events like this a year.
You should also remember that the MAAC Nationals move around the country.
This event would be again at the same place and time each year.
IF you smell CARP - I would tell you to take a bath.
08-15-2006, 12:42 PM
#70
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Windsor,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: adaptabl
I have a hard time believing that the Chatham club would vote to ask other MAAC member not to attend an event. There are a bunch of great people there. I know our club would welcome any MAAC(or AMA) member to any event or just to share our field with(even these few). Every Chatham member(other than these few) gave every visiting pilot top notch respect and courtesy.
I wonder if there are minutes from the club meeting for this vote? Was there really a vote by the club membership?
This sounds too petty for any club to do.
I have a hard time believing that the Chatham club would vote to ask other MAAC member not to attend an event. There are a bunch of great people there. I know our club would welcome any MAAC(or AMA) member to any event or just to share our field with(even these few). Every Chatham member(other than these few) gave every visiting pilot top notch respect and courtesy.
I wonder if there are minutes from the club meeting for this vote? Was there really a vote by the club membership?
This sounds too petty for any club to do.
Do you REALLY think Norm would make that phone call without his CLUB approval??
Dennis, John and Chris have call members of that club names.
Dennis has stuck his NOISE in Chatham Aeronauts business - unwanted.
Wrote 2 letters now, last year crying that he was not invited to a private party, and this year crying that he was not welcomed at the event.
Well to me when your ASKED NOT to ATTEND I would guess your not welcome at the event.
I think a CLUB has the RIGHT to ask a MAAC members NOT to attend there events.
08-15-2006, 03:22 PM
#71
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Windsor, ON, CANADA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Jabba
Hard time or NOT that is what happen.
Do you REALLY think Norm would make that phone call without his CLUB approval??
I think a CLUB has the RIGHT to ask a MAAC members NOT to attend there events.
ORIGINAL: adaptabl
I have a hard time believing that the Chatham club would vote to ask other MAAC member not to attend an event. There are a bunch of great people there. I know our club would welcome any MAAC(or AMA) member to any event or just to share our field with(even these few). Every Chatham member(other than these few) gave every visiting pilot top notch respect and courtesy.
I wonder if there are minutes from the club meeting for this vote? Was there really a vote by the club membership?
This sounds too petty for any club to do.
I have a hard time believing that the Chatham club would vote to ask other MAAC member not to attend an event. There are a bunch of great people there. I know our club would welcome any MAAC(or AMA) member to any event or just to share our field with(even these few). Every Chatham member(other than these few) gave every visiting pilot top notch respect and courtesy.
I wonder if there are minutes from the club meeting for this vote? Was there really a vote by the club membership?
This sounds too petty for any club to do.
Do you REALLY think Norm would make that phone call without his CLUB approval??
I think a CLUB has the RIGHT to ask a MAAC members NOT to attend there events.
I would really love to see the actual VOTES of how many people voted as to the amounts of members that you claimed to have voted, if there was any vote at all. I still believe it was pressure put on Norm by a select few to try and force the issue of the phone call.
Palmer. Answer this. If it wasn't a MAAC event as you say, why would some of the zone directors show up? They would have no authority to control whether or not you let Dennis, John or Chris fly.
Unless of course you're still trying to USE MAAC for the insurance which of course would entitle the Z/D's control of the issue... Think about Palmer. All three still flew even without YOUR permission. The authority of the Fried Few went nowhere.
So was it a MAAC event or not?
I'm surprised the Chatham club is letting you speak for them on this contentious issue unless everything you are saying about the Chatham club is true. Nobody seems to be defending these devious actions of BARRING someone from flying.
It boils down to this. Either you are telling the truth about the Chatham Club and they're not willing to defend their actions or you are lying. But why would you lie? What would you gain by lying to us MAAC members?
The only way I see it is that, if it wasn't a MAAC event, then you guys had NO insurance. It it was a MAAC event, then you didn't have JUST CAUSE to deny these guys to fly.
08-15-2006, 07:38 PM
#72
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Mentor34
Dennis
08-15-2006, 08:09 PM
#73
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Windsor, ON, CANADA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
Dennis. I'm just like any other member. Just trying to get the truth. Something that seems very difficult to get from the CAC gang.
08-15-2006, 11:35 PM
#74
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Windsor,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chatham Contest August 19th
ORIGINAL: Mentor34
Palmer. Why would Norm and the Chatham Club vote and tell MAAC members not to come when they weren't MAAC events according to you?
I would really love to see the actual VOTES of how many people voted as to the amounts of members that you claimed to have voted, if there was any vote at all. I still believe it was pressure put on Norm by a select few to try and force the issue of the phone call.
Palmer. Answer this. If it wasn't a MAAC event as you say, why would some of the zone directors show up? They would have no authority to control whether or not you let Dennis, John or Chris fly.
Unless of course you're still trying to USE MAAC for the insurance which of course would entitle the Z/D's control of the issue... Think about Palmer. All three still flew even without YOUR permission. The authority of the Fried Few went nowhere.
So was it a MAAC event or not?
I'm surprised the Chatham club is letting you speak for them on this contentious issue unless everything you are saying about the Chatham club is true. Nobody seems to be defending these devious actions of BARRING someone from flying.
It boils down to this. Either you are telling the truth about the Chatham Club and they're not willing to defend their actions or you are lying. But why would you lie? What would you gain by lying to us MAAC members?
The only way I see it is that, if it wasn't a MAAC event, then you guys had NO insurance. It it was a MAAC event, then you didn't have JUST CAUSE to deny these guys to fly.
ORIGINAL: Jabba
Hard time or NOT that is what happen.
Do you REALLY think Norm would make that phone call without his CLUB approval??
I think a CLUB has the RIGHT to ask a MAAC members NOT to attend there events.
ORIGINAL: adaptabl
I have a hard time believing that the Chatham club would vote to ask other MAAC member not to attend an event. There are a bunch of great people there. I know our club would welcome any MAAC(or AMA) member to any event or just to share our field with(even these few). Every Chatham member(other than these few) gave every visiting pilot top notch respect and courtesy.
I wonder if there are minutes from the club meeting for this vote? Was there really a vote by the club membership?
This sounds too petty for any club to do.
I have a hard time believing that the Chatham club would vote to ask other MAAC member not to attend an event. There are a bunch of great people there. I know our club would welcome any MAAC(or AMA) member to any event or just to share our field with(even these few). Every Chatham member(other than these few) gave every visiting pilot top notch respect and courtesy.
I wonder if there are minutes from the club meeting for this vote? Was there really a vote by the club membership?
This sounds too petty for any club to do.
Do you REALLY think Norm would make that phone call without his CLUB approval??
I think a CLUB has the RIGHT to ask a MAAC members NOT to attend there events.
I would really love to see the actual VOTES of how many people voted as to the amounts of members that you claimed to have voted, if there was any vote at all. I still believe it was pressure put on Norm by a select few to try and force the issue of the phone call.
Palmer. Answer this. If it wasn't a MAAC event as you say, why would some of the zone directors show up? They would have no authority to control whether or not you let Dennis, John or Chris fly.
Unless of course you're still trying to USE MAAC for the insurance which of course would entitle the Z/D's control of the issue... Think about Palmer. All three still flew even without YOUR permission. The authority of the Fried Few went nowhere.
So was it a MAAC event or not?
I'm surprised the Chatham club is letting you speak for them on this contentious issue unless everything you are saying about the Chatham club is true. Nobody seems to be defending these devious actions of BARRING someone from flying.
It boils down to this. Either you are telling the truth about the Chatham Club and they're not willing to defend their actions or you are lying. But why would you lie? What would you gain by lying to us MAAC members?
The only way I see it is that, if it wasn't a MAAC event, then you guys had NO insurance. It it was a MAAC event, then you didn't have JUST CAUSE to deny these guys to fly.
Well give NORM a call and ask him.
Again the Chatham club did not want them to attend the event.
but they just had to CRASH it.