mustang one

This has just been released by the Committee

"It is with regret that we have to announce the cancellation of our August 12 Sam and August 18-20 Scale Combat /Scale contests. Due to misinformation ,political conditions and lack of interest in contests in genersl,the contest committee decided to take this action.We felt that after a very successful Nats last year, that the atmosphere was right for this type of event to grow each and every year. This does not seem to be the case,therefore this decision had to be made
We hope that perhaps these conditions will change in future years."

The Chatham Scale Contest Committee


To Bad you will not have a scale masters qualifier or top gun qualifier this year

Jason Holdaway

what were you planning to fly this year chuckles?

mustang one

deleted

mustang one

can't fly when you are running the meet. to bad you and your buddies destroyed the event for everyone

adaptabl

It sounds like there was just not enough interest in this event. There may be many reasons for this.

Jason Holdaway

I suggest you get some Windex and clean off your mirror.

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

The Chatham Aeronauts Club issued the following official statement today .

The Official Notice from the Chatham Aeronauts without the personal embellishments.

"CHATHAM AERONAUTS ANNOUNCEMENT OF EVENT CANCELLATIONS."

Chatham R/C SAM contest August 12,2006.

Chatham R/C Scale Combat contest August 13.2006.

Chatham R/C Scale contest August 18-20,2006.

"Due to a lack of preregistrations and support to organize and manage these events effectivley following MAAC guidelines and safety code,the Chatham Aeronauts have decided that the above events be cancelled.
We regret any inconvenience that this may cause modellers planning to attend .
Pre-registrants will be mailed a refund in short order.

Signed

Norm McLellan- Contest Director

Jim Easter-President

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

........... enough. Damage was done for many years previous. Game over.

d_bodary

My Feedback: (85)

I thought August 19th and 20th was a pattern contest anyway at Chatham.

Dennis

Flying Canuk

The pattern contest is the 19th and held at the field. The other stuff that got cancelled was to be held at the civic airport.

mustang one

sharpe wrote: ........... enough. Damage was done for many years previous. Game over


this is always an interesting statement, Damage has been done, but know one will state what damage.

So Mr. Sharpe please state exactly what you are talking about.

Jason Holdaway

I think the worst damage was to friendships, followed closely by reputations and ego's

Morison

How about you promise to not threaten a libel suit if Mark (or anyone else) outlines the 'damage' that is widely talked about.
Even if your libel accusations are groundless, a nusiance suit would still be costly and time consuming enough to make people be (overly) cautious about what they say.

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

Keith makes a valid point..............but it wouldn't change my lack of interest to debate any of this further.

THe related issues and people surrounding them are no longer relevant ................. and there won't be any life-lines tossed from my direction..............

[sm=drowning.gif]

mustang one

Mr Morrison

Once again you show yourself as one who does not know what happened or took the time to find out.
There was no libel suits threatened, just facts stated. Iam sure that if people where lieing about you and dilivberately smearing your reputation, you would take appropriate action to stop it.

If the statement, my client will not allow his reputation to be smeared any longer, threatens you, I guess you have a reason to be threatened.

Example of lie put on web site which you supported, Breach of Confidenciality concerning new by-laws, You as editor should be completely aware that the new by-laws where released Feb 05 in your mag. You should also be aware that in the mag report of the 05 AGM these same by-laws where tabled for further study. therefore if the by-laws where released 05 where is the breach in 06.

PS any time I can convince a major advertisier to look at your posts and decide if they want to be associated with the crap you put up here, It is going to be my pleasure. Of coarse it will be their decision

mustang one

Typical from Sharpe, lots of statements that are open ended but when challenged to make hard factual statements, he runs and hides.

We can't let the actual truth out, can we Sharpe

Propworn

My Feedback: (3)

Gee wiz Chuck this is going to mean a lot from someone no longer a member in good standing with MAAC and from what Randy hints at it sounds like the AMA has done the same. So when this is pointed out to those same advertisers its nothing more than the same sour grapes that got you into the position you find yourself today. You must be one all time slow learner my boy. You have dug yourself one deep hole and you continue to pull dirt in on top of yourself. When will it stop? Maybe when you have totally buried yourself you can have Palmer hop up and down on the dirt to pack it down eh? Chuck when the rest of the world is wrong and you are the only one who is right it might be time to rethink your position. You seem to think this is all about winning or loosing. Its not it’s about keeping the health and growth of the hobby and MAAC and if it means one must put aside personal agendas then let it be so. When you cannot and instead try to tear up what you cannot control or force your will upon it exposes your immaturity. We expect this attitude from children (if I can't have my way then I will wreck it for everyone else just for spite). By the time one reaches adulthood thankfully most have outgrown this. Don't you get it by now? No one cares what you think or do. No great uprising of the masses as predicted. No massive support for your agendas. Nothing Chuck but yawn indifference. Ever stop to think that all of the things that you and your FEW minions said were going to happen in fact not one has come to pass. NOT ONE THING CHUCK that in itself speaks volumes. Chuck your old news like it or not everyone has moved on. I see two choices for you. Try and mend the fences, convince those who need convincing of your sincerity that you wish to make amends and work towards getting reinstated or continue on as you have been in which case you are lowering yourself to common household pest and if that is the path you choose do not be surprised if eventually you get business end of a fly swatter. Grow up Chuck move up or move on please.

From Dennis Pratt in Cottage Country

Morison

Splitting hairs, I didn't make direct reference to any past actions. I simply asked if you would refrain from threatening libel action if Mark chose to speak freely about comments and accusations made by others.

It is only semantics that separate that from a threat of a Libel suit. Pretending that it is anything BUT a threat is childish at best. As I say, the filing of a nuisance suit is generally enough to get people who haven't slandered you to back down to avoid the hassle.

Pardon me! I'm not sure what you are talking about, I doubt that I would have ever taken a position on that specific action. I have taken positions, based in well documented fact and common practices, about the duties of a member of the board of directors. Breaching confidentiality does fall under those duties.

There was no breach in 2006 ... it was at the 2005 SW AZM.
The bylaws released in the Feb 2005 MAC are different than the by-laws released in the February 2006 MAC - completely different.
The motions that came from the SW Zone meeting were amendments to the new bylaws, which were released to the board of directors in confidence and were not supposed to be released until publication in the February issue of MAC. (I just checked the wording of the amendments against both sets of bylaws.)
Further, from Attachment 8 to the 2005 SW Zone AZM minutes ...
'The constitution committee is recommending a completely new set of by-laws be put forward for approval. Richard Barlow, as chair of the committee, has issued a request that the document and amendments be kept secret until issuance in the Feb MAAC Mag.
'The southwest zone, holding true to its policy of transparency, has not complied with the request [from] Barlow. ...'
Not sure what any of this has to do with you, however, as in this case you were not the director involved, and I would have never suggested you were.

I'm sure the members will be happy to see that you are actively trying to impact the quality and added content of MAC. By trying to persuade advertisers to pull their exposure to the 10,000 members of MAAC, you are impacting their ability to get the best and most cost effective exposure to the Canadian market, and you are impacting my ability to add pages and additional interesting content for the members.
My posts are carefully researched and worded. Just because you don't like what you read doesn't mean that I am wrong. Be aware that I have often posted in your defense, assuming that you wouldn't have taken actions that would clearly have been inappropriate.
I'd be interested in what you might have said to any 'major' advertisers and how those comments might stand up to scrutiny under the defamation laws ... not that I'd ever actually take action on that or, for that matter, the defamation in your post #15 above.

*edited to add futher comment and clarification

Sharpy01

My Feedback: (12)

Dennis, wow. ....... What could I possibly add to that?

Seeya Chuck. [sm=drowning.gif]

I'm going flying.................................because I can.

mustang one

Once again all Pratt can do is attack personnelly. Why you are in bed with Pratt ( Mr Sharpe) is totally beyond me. Especailly after he contacted your employer and had you repremanded, so it is understood.

Mr Morrison, if you ever read the old bylaws form 05 and compared them to 06 you would find very little changed. Dave Planke was even credited for the work.

Not so nice to have someone try to make your reputation look bad and effect what you do is it ( Mr Morrison )

My point has been made, you lie, you distort the truth and do what ever you can to discredit individuals who have done a hell of a lot for MAAC.

The only reason there was a hole dug was the knowing of Dennis Pratt, at least I was invited to the Chatham event to participate anyway possible. Mr Pratt was told to stay home because no one wanted him or his buddies there. That speaks volumns Pratt

To the good folks of RC Universe, I can not and will not be part of a program that allows the likes of Mr Pratt and his cronies to abuse individuals who he simpley does not like. Pratt is the worst sort of meneis, he preys on the weak and destroys what he can not create. He fabricates lies, jepordises the families of somewhat unsuspecting bystanders , uses so called friendships to later destroy the lives of those individuals. Yes Pratt is the winner, to bad it cost him more than he will ever imagine

The so called loosers of the SW Zone have done more to develope MAAC, promote MAAC and help its growth then Pratt and his army will ever do. So here is to the New Scale Chairman, to bad you had to discredit the old one and have him kicked out to get the job

My last word to Pratt is @###@$@#$%#
[sm=sunsmiley.gif][sm=thumbup.gif][sm=bananahead.gif][sm=crying.gif][sm=kiss.gif][sm=kiss.gif][sm=kiss.gif]

Mr Morrison, I guess your attitude will change when you loose the MAAC contract FYI Major manufactures don't see your mag as a viable advertising venue. IMHO

Randy Brown

Man Chuck you just dont no when to stop, You wish me to tell you the truth.I be glad to and trust me your not going to like it

Randy Brown

Thats it. your cut off of that donute diet Marc

Jason Holdaway

It is apparent that I have made some assumptions about Randy that aren't true. I owe Randy a public apology. I'm sorry Randy.

Jason Holdaway

Applehoney

My Feedback: (3)

>My point has been made, you lie, you distort the truth and do what ever you can to discredit individuals who have done a hell of a lot for MAAC.

You're getting better, Chuck - you must be looking in the mirror for at least you are now recognising how levelheaded MAAC members perceive you

Morison

I stand corrected. I'll admit that my comparison was limited to the sections that were referenced in the resolutions coming from the SW zone. I beleive that two of the resolutions regarded sections that weren't in the earlier document at all and others referred sections where the wording was distinct between the two. On further comparison you are right, much of the document is the same.
It remains clear, however, that the bylaws used to author the resolutions were the bylaws that were given to the board in confidence.

OK, I'm lost, and I am sure others are as well. How has your point been made?
I have not lied, distorted the truth or done anything to discredit anyone.
I have pointed to fact and matters of public record. Anyone who feels attacked or discredited is a victim of their own actions.
You should note that the quote I cite from 'Attachment 8' includes the 'transparancy' justification for breeching confidence.
(those unclear on defamation should note that the quote from Mustang one above is, without question, libel... )

I highly doubt that I will loose the contract, I have done nothing even close to breeching the conditions of the agreement. When the contract comes up for tender again, I expect competition and I trust that the board of directors will award the contract to the best bid.(not always the lowest price)
Not being awarded a contract is different than loosing it and, quite frankly, I'm not sure I'll be submitting a bid next time around.
Also, I am fully aware that some 'major' manufacturers don't consider the association's magazine as a viable vehicle for advertising their product. All I said was that MAC was the "best and most cost effective exposure to the Canadian market."