Well, every time I make that statement I increase the percentage a little bit, but once I hit 99.99% I go ahead and drop back down to about 75%, doesn't matter since it's made up anyway. Fun part is, the more I make that statement, the more true it becomes. Nothing like a self-fulfilling prophecy (or statistic in this case) to really get the juices pumping on a Monday.

I'm with you Matt. Doesn't feel like anyone is home.With the % that voted for the proposals on the survey verses the number of members in the NSRCA. Contact Lance and voice your opinion. I will get to see Jon at the next contest and get to voice mine but I'm sure he knows it already. Mc harg's statement says to me the numbers do not add up for backing of the board on these proposals. I understand the frustration I wish I had not handed over the the VP job maybe I could have prevented this nonsense of the board backing proposals that does not have a clear majority or even close to 50% backing of the membership. But alas hindsight is 20/20.


Gary

Oh, and I had time to go back and check your assertion that a "high percentage" voted yes, and if by "high percentage" you mean 51.4% of the survey respondents, then yes, that is a very convincing majority. Pretty sure that's a statistical dead heat considering the margin of error is probably +/- 8%.

Stats are so much fun.

OK, time for bed.

Human mind thinks differently and randomly :-).

Mr. Matt, I am not understanding your logic. First, you speak of not looking at the results of everyone, that you should just look at the results of the membership of the NSRCA. You contradict yourself by this statement by saying 51.4% as this is the number for all that took the survey. If you were to simply do as you suggest in the first place, the percentage is actually 52.6%. I am of knowledge that the 1.2% increase is not significant in itself but you neglect to give the whole story regardless of the number you choose to use. The more important difference in the results is the percentage of individuals who voted against. In only the members of the NSRCA, that percentage is 43.2% and as a whole group, the number is only slightly higher at 44.9%. I think that you are not looking at the whole picture regardless of how you say the survey is flawed. You seem to use numbers that are to your convenience and do not state the entire truth.

As Ihave said before, I may be new to America but it is interesting how numbers that are used to fit the argument at hand but the entire picture is not drawn. I think it is also important to point out that the NSRCA cannot force individuals to take the survey, they can only offer this process in hopes that membership will take advantage of it. Those of you who are upset with the NSRCA should be upset with those that did not take this survey, not with the company that put it on. These are the results that they had to work with and if you look at the whole picture, it appears that they have acted in accordance with the results. Mr. Gary seems to understand how to make the world go around and have all the answers. Maybe he should be the president. It is so disrespectful, these actions of no tolerance. I think that this bickering is ridiculous and rather sad. Some wonder why the population of pattern has decreased. All I would do if Iwere new to the precision aerobatics and see all of this action and dissention and realize I would not want to be associated with all this. I was of the understanding this was for fun. Some would make it pure misery. Luckily, Ilove F3A and just will put in my two cents. To the new person:Not all have this attitude of dispair and misery and anger. Come out to the field and understand the grace and beauty of F3A and precision aerobatics.

Riley

Mr Riley..


What you fail to realize as does the board of the NSRCA we have over 400+ members and as you say 40+ ???something percent voted in favor or even 50 +or - a few percent in favor take the number that voted divide that into the total number of NSRCA members and you will come up with less than 15 or 20+ or- percent in favor .
In the great old US of A.. generally a majority rules some thing that is lost on the board of the NSRCA and possibly yourself in this instance.....

I have served on the board... I have a little insight as to whats going on and insight on a few past opinions on past issues that was also outside the Boards purview of which I have a very strong position on( that's another story that needs to be told at another time though) ...Regardless if the measure passes the AMA .This board is outside its realm on this issue as the majority have not been heard and their data is incomplete as to total membership wishes yet. I pay for the right to be a member therefor I pay for the right to jump up and down and holler and scream like a spoiled rotten child when i strongly disagree with and feel misrepresented by.

Show me a majority of the members of the NSRCA that want these issues passed and I will shut the flock up about the board backing them..

I have great respect for many of the members of the board. people which I have flow against, broken bread with, hoisted a few with and even handed out a few dollar bills at places where you hand out dollar bills at.( For charity purposes only I'm sure)

Join the NSRCA my friend Riley.. Its a good organization... And try to have a voice...


Its about proper representation my friend Riley.. and nothing more..


Gary Courtney

Matt and Gary, I guess that told you! Maybe I'm missing something, is there a sign posted around somewhere stating that this is a public forum and your responses are subject to scrutiny and you run the risk of being taken to task? Just thought I would ask..........BTW Gary, thank you and "You go boy!"

Then Mr. Gary, you must contend that any law passed by American voters is null and void. No vote has ever been taken in American law that constitutes a majority of its citizens therefore they are all void. This is illogical and does not stand to reason. America can only ask for the vote. It does not go back later and say this vote does not count because there is not a majority of voters. Similarly, the NSRCA can only act on the information that has received yet you put a lashing on the people. I do not understand this. Why not be upset with those that did not give their opinion? I am not defending their decision, simply stating your rationale is open to conjecture and is flawed.<div></div><div>Riley

<div></div></div>

Riley,

One thing you do not understand is that in his writing Mr Matt was mixing in some real numbers with some made-up numbers to demonstrate how statistics can be misleading. There is a famous quote - from Mark Twain, I think - "There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics."

If you are who you say you are (one never knows for sure online, but I'll presume you are), then I will say your English is pretty darn good, but the ability to "read between the lines" to understand the sarcasm, wit and nuance of what is being said is something that takes time to develop.

In the meantime, you might want to just "chill out" and follow along for a while. Already you hold the record for being the most stressed out after the fewest posts on RCU.

(That's a joke of sorts - hence the )

Please keep on the topic of the thread. This one is under close scrutiny by several folks. We won't let it go in the direction it was headed a few pages back.

CGretired,
Forum Moderator.

+1 Bob, "You go boy", also......

My guess is that rileyf3a is a troll. Notice when he signed up to RCU and where he has posted. If possible, maybe RCU can check in to who rileyf3a really is.

His posts seem similar in structure and "logic" to some I used to see on another site. I'll leave it at that.

I'm really only interested in NSRCA members opinion about the boards actions. BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! He obviously is a troll as Toney pointed out.. I of coarse am known an prolly infamous for more than one reason or the other by now.. I am not afraid to voice my opinion in public and not have to hide behind my computer. I can disagree strongly to one's face and drink a brew with afterwards. A troll on the other hand hides behind their mum's skirt so to speak.LOL.. If he is found to be a troll I hope the moderators out him. Like the other troll they outed a couple years ago using a troll identity and making personal attacks ...

If he is not then "allow me to retort"( pulp fiction luv that movie) Mr Riley "or what ever"comparing being a member of the NSRCA and the boards action without the full voice membership being heard to one's CIVIC duty so to speak is completely asinine.

Mr Riley let us know more about yourself as we may get to know you and actually take you seriously...


MR Gary

If my posts get to strong I ask the moderator to simply delete the post and not shut the thread down...Please



Gary

Wow, I take a day off and things get off track. As Bob astutely pointed out, I was being sarcastic for most of my previous few posts. I didn't double-check the numbers but I think when I figured the percentage "for" the weight increase I used the numbers 55 for, 48 against, and 4 no comment. If I didn't get the numbers exactly right sue me. However, 55/107 = .514, or 51.4% for the measure. The exactness of the number however is irrelevant to the point I was trying to make that the NSRCA needs to put something in writing that will require major changes to the rules, such as a 500 gram increase to the weight limit, require at least a 2/3 majority for the measure. It's impossible to close Pandora's Box, so you better make damn sure everyone wants to open it. By the way, when I threw out a +/- 8% margin of error on the survey I had just pulled that number out of my nether regions. Finally had time today to check that number, and assuming there are 500 pattern pilots (probably more than that though), and you had a sample size of 107, your margin of error is +/- 8.41%. Sometimes I'm so good it's scary. Now that I have confirmed that the "for" was not above 50% by more than the margin of error, this just further proves that the NSRCA board did a piss-poor job this rules cycle and needs to learn a valuable lesson from this lapse in leadership. Change just for change's sake is a bad move for anyone. Someone posted a very good e-mail to the NSRCA mailing list the other day that sums up every point I've been trying to make. Here's the final paragraph from that message:

Changing the rules has never, and will never increase participation.

Perhaps 100% of the board was in favor of the proposals. That's well above any margin of error.
In most representative forms of government we elect people to use their experience, knowledge, and judgement in our collective best interest. They are not obligated to decide whichever way the majority wants. It's not a democracy, it's a representative form of government. We elect them to use their best judgement on our behalf, and if we don't like the decisions they make it's our responsibility to vote them out of office when their term ends.
NSRCA members vote by not voting too. If a majority don't respond to a survey, it doesn't invalidate the survey. Same as any election where people don't vote.
Also, we are talking about AMA rules, not NSRCA rules. Any AMA member can and should have a voice in making decisions that affect the AMA rules.

In this age of "political correctness and sensitivity for the feelings of others" that we all have had shoved down our throat over the last 3+ years, it is time to say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! IMHO, it does not take any real talent to disguise one's self as a minority member from the middle east. As part of his strategy, this individual eluded to his heritage on several occasions with the hope that no one would dare challenge him? I've got news for you partner.............

.
I was hoping you were just getting warmed up!!!
.
As for the "RileyF3A" character, I bet if RCU does an IP geolocation search they will find he is posting from nowhere near California but closer to central Tennessee. Just a "wild" guess on my part. . .
.

Dave.B.

I disagree with you . Neither side of the issue has been represented by the board.. I do not need a rule change to be safe or make weight or to fly cheap.. All I need is a $30 scale and some good old understanding about technique and patience.. Really all anyone needs when building or selecting materials for assembly as we do for ARF's or building as we do for kits.. Its been proven from the dawn of model flight by those that are attentive.


Gary

Remember Fast Freddy?

.
Yup, time to bust a Sock Puppet . . .
.
All of Riley's posts will be (self) deleted in 3. . . 2 . . . .1 . . .
.

Fast Freddy was a hell of a flyer too. I got caught up in his postings and it put me in a bad position. I'm very careful about what I say on RCU now. Mike

Hi Mike, refresh my memory. Wasn't Fast Freddy tracked down and found living outside of Memphis, TN and claiming to be some sort of "professional pilot" and a pattern wannabe/hack (Both at the same time)? Trust me, he is still alive and well and continuing to contribute in his very small way.......

Gary,
I was just commenting on the process, not the merits of the proposals.
I don't know what input the board has had to make their decisions on, I'm sure a lot of it was not included in the survey or the on-line forums. I know I communicated my views to my district VP directly. I'll do the same to my AMA Contest Board member too.
Dave