View Full Version : US Competition Pilot Poll
Hello US competition pilots.
Our annual poll about topics related to competition and associated rules is now open at http://www.adamsfive.com/a5soaring/survey/surveys.php.
It is open to all pilots on the ranking list.
Feedback from the poll and associated comments, as well as messages via e-mail to committee members, are the basis for our annual deliberations.
Please participate and mention to your contest buddies.
The poll is open until October 18th.
For the RC
UH
Dave Nadler
October 3rd 17, 07:53 PM
A few problems here:
6.1.2 - Ambiguous; what does a "YES" answer mean?
6.3.1 - What does "MyChoice" checkbox mean?
6.3.2 - """"
Thanks!
Steve Koerner
October 3rd 17, 08:07 PM
On Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 11:53:33 AM UTC-7, Dave Nadler wrote:
> A few problems here:
>
> 6.1.2 - Ambiguous; what does a "YES" answer mean?
> 6.3.1 - What does "MyChoice" checkbox mean?
> 6.3.2 - """"
>
> Thanks!
I didn't have a problem with "my choice". Just look to the left to see what you'd be choosing. 6.1.2 though will have to be ignored.
On Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 2:53:33 PM UTC-4, Dave Nadler wrote:
> A few problems here:
>
> 6.1.2 - Ambiguous; what does a "YES" answer mean?
> 6.3.1 - What does "MyChoice" checkbox mean?
> 6.3.2 - """"
>
> Thanks!
We flubbed that question.
6.1.2 will shortly be revised to
""If start out the top is retained, do you favor retaining (yes) or eliminating (no) the rule only giving distance credit for starts in the front half of the cylinder?"
For the RC
UH
MNLou
October 4th 17, 04:23 PM
On question 3.1 under Tracking, there could be multiple answers. I use both an InReach and a cell phone tracker.
Thanks!
Lou
I would like to see the current opinion poll published PUBLICLY each year and not hidden inside the poll tool.
What are you guys so afraid of? Why are you hiding this document? Even though only a few take the poll the methods and topics are useful for the entire SSA membership. No?
Where can we see it? I look forward to discussing how some the questions are leading and "framed" (ROTFL). It's hilarious.
I took screenshots of course, but would like to give the RC the opportunity to publish their poll themselves on the SSA website so we can see what they are doing (those not "qualified" to be included in the poll…"
Ill give this 48 hours…then its weapons free.
The way these questions are written is nothing less than hysterical and it must be discussed in open forums and on social media.
Thanks,
Sean
Tango Eight
October 5th 17, 07:36 PM
On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 2:12:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> I would like to see the current opinion poll published PUBLICLY each year and not hidden inside the poll tool.
>
> What are you guys so afraid of? Why are you hiding this document? Even though only a few take the poll the methods and topics are useful for the entire SSA membership. No?
>
> Where can we see it? I look forward to discussing how some the questions are leading and "framed" (ROTFL). It's hilarious.
>
> I took screenshots of course, but would like to give the RC the opportunity to publish their poll themselves on the SSA website so we can see what they are doing (those not "qualified" to be included in the poll…"
>
> Ill give this 48 hours…then its weapons free.
>
> The way these questions are written is nothing less than hysterical and it must be discussed in open forums and on social media.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sean
lol @ Mr Internet Tough Guy. I was just wondering out loud (yesterday, I have witnesses) who you were going to insult, next. You're getting awfully predictable there.
It is sort of interesting that this has escaped your notice....
http://www.ssa.org/ContestRules
Yep, there are all the opinion polls, with responses, all handy and public. Not the 2017 poll, yet, of course, but in due time, they always publish.
Cheers,
T8
On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 2:12:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> I would like to see the current opinion poll published PUBLICLY each year and not hidden inside the poll tool.
> Thanks,
>
> Sean
The secret to the hidden poll tool is to enter any name and any number, then you can see all the questions. To submit, the name and number have to be valid.
It isn't hard, you just need to stop complaining long enough to give it a try.
Guy Byars
Tom Kelley #711
October 5th 17, 10:30 PM
On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 3:01:17 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 2:12:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > I would like to see the current opinion poll published PUBLICLY each year and not hidden inside the poll tool.
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Sean
>
> The secret to the hidden poll tool is to enter any name and any number, then you can see all the questions. To submit, the name and number have to be valid.
>
> It isn't hard, you just need to stop complaining long enough to give it a try.
>
> Guy Byars
..
Thanks Guy,
For pointing that out and
for answering what was a "Deleterious" statement!
"Deleterious" defined as harmful, damaging, detrimental, injurious; adverse, disadvantageous, unfavorable, unfortunate, undesirable, bad.
Best. Tom #711.
Not the answers, just the raw poll. We need to demonstrate how the RC tries to lead the witness. Total joke, every year. Bias. Do t worry, I’ll shine the light.
On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 5:01:17 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 2:12:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > I would like to see the current opinion poll published PUBLICLY each year and not hidden inside the poll tool.
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Sean
>
> The secret to the hidden poll tool is to enter any name and any number, then you can see all the questions. To submit, the name and number have to be valid.
>
> It isn't hard, you just need to stop complaining long enough to give it a try.
>
> Guy Byars
On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 6:49:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Hello US competition pilots.
> Our annual poll about topics related to competition and associated rules is now open at http://www.adamsfive.com/a5soaring/survey/surveys.php.
> It is open to all pilots on the ranking list.
> Feedback from the poll and associated comments, as well as messages via e-mail to committee members, are the basis for our annual deliberations.
> Please participate and mention to your contest buddies.
> The poll is open until October 18th.
> For the RC
> UH
Sean,
Thanks for advocating that we consider FAI rules. I was pleased to see the topic in the poll.
If the Rules Committee is anything like the US Team Committee someone volunteers to produce the text and the committee comments on it and that's it. You get the natural bias of the individuals involved - this is normal.
Perhaps the best way to influence this is to submit suggested poll questions to the committee during summer. I remember being polled for questions at the Uvalde rules meeting. My topics got included but I did not provide suggested question text, so some kind fellow wrote the question without my involvement. Overall it appears to be working.
Each question has a comment box where you could suggest what the question should have been and your response. It's hard to please everyone but the comment box really helps.
UH and Diane rescued me and my trailer from the side of a dark and rainy NJ highway on the way to Uvalde after a van fuel line failure. God bless them.. This is not the behavior that I associate with some master rules plot.
Let's try to find a positive way to encourage reasoned dialogue.
Cheers,
Bob Fletcher 90
Sean Fidler
October 6th 17, 07:02 PM
90,
I see three systemic and troubling issues with the SSA US rules system (opinion poll, RC, etc.). We have discussed these offline, and you made some strong points. Nonetheless, the current system is quite flawed (biased) if you are not part of the SSA good old boys, anti-FAI, groupthink. You made another great point that this bias is natural and difficult to purge (and bias systems do not want to be exterminated). That is the heart of the issue.
MY PRIMARY CONCERN with US rules remains that doing so when the international soaring community already manages the FAI rules, is exceptionally inefficient. US rules are a HUGE waste of time when you consider a rule system is already available and is already used by the vast majority of the soaring world, right now, today. Don't we have better things to focus on?
What is the value of US Rules? What do we gain by recreating and maintaining our own custom "wheels" for everything? Do we have higher contest participation? Greater safety? Higher growth? More Youth? No. No, we do not.. Think about that for a moment. Despite no tangible value, we still spend the resources to manage: The US rules definitions, US Rules scoring software, US rules handicaps, SSA contest management systems (registration, etc.), SSA scoring display websites (SSA.org, SUCKS!), SSA contest reporting, SSA contest tracking, etc. Also, having our own obscure US rule system isolates our contest pilots, and our youth from the FAI raking system, contest reporting community, social media, etc.
1) The US Rules Committee has been staffed exclusively by people who genuinely believe that US rules are a better path and the FAI rules are bad. Without this general viewpoint, their election to the US RC is highly unlikely, to this day. That is a biased system.
2) The US Rules opinion poll is written by these same US rules "fans" who make it to the committee. They are inherently biased. US rules ARE DOGMA to them. Now that some pressure is on them (return to FAI makes sense to many US pilots), they are paying lip service to the FAI idea (offering a slow change option, whatever that means). I believe they are also trying to buy time to (they hope) effect change in other areas (FAI scoring, etc.). Most of the Good Old Boys do not want FAI rules. They still, in general, actively dislike the FAI and strongly prefer the power the US rules system provides them (killing technology, etc.). They even go so far as to write their own point/counterpoint addendums to many of the most controversial questions in their own poll. And as you might expect, those point/counterpoint descriptions are WAY OFF THE MARK in describing the argument for FAI rules, for no out the top start, for no extra TAT distance accumulation in ASSIGNED(?) task turns, etc. I'll point this out in a blog post I am writing, as promised. I have saved screenshots of all opinion polls that I have experienced. The examples are PLENTIFUL.
3) The same gang then "analyzes" the results and makes policy.
I will continue to advocate for a better system for determining our rules direction.
Sean
7T
At a minimum, the counterpoints in the questions should be written (or linked externally) to a real argument by those who believe passionately in them.. Not paraphrased by those who don't want them.
On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 10:57:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 6:49:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > Hello US competition pilots.
> > Our annual poll about topics related to competition and associated rules is now open at http://www.adamsfive.com/a5soaring/survey/surveys.php.
> > It is open to all pilots on the ranking list.
> > Feedback from the poll and associated comments, as well as messages via e-mail to committee members, are the basis for our annual deliberations.
> > Please participate and mention to your contest buddies.
> > The poll is open until October 18th.
> > For the RC
> > UH
>
> Sean,
> Thanks for advocating that we consider FAI rules. I was pleased to see the topic in the poll.
>
> If the Rules Committee is anything like the US Team Committee someone volunteers to produce the text and the committee comments on it and that's it. You get the natural bias of the individuals involved - this is normal.
>
> Perhaps the best way to influence this is to submit suggested poll questions to the committee during summer. I remember being polled for questions at the Uvalde rules meeting. My topics got included but I did not provide suggested question text, so some kind fellow wrote the question without my involvement. Overall it appears to be working.
>
> Each question has a comment box where you could suggest what the question should have been and your response. It's hard to please everyone but the comment box really helps.
>
> UH and Diane rescued me and my trailer from the side of a dark and rainy NJ highway on the way to Uvalde after a van fuel line failure. God bless them. This is not the behavior that I associate with some master rules plot.
>
> Let's try to find a positive way to encourage reasoned dialogue.
>
> Cheers,
> Bob Fletcher 90
Tango Eight
October 7th 17, 01:15 PM
Why maintain control over our own rules? Exhibit A would be the recent changes to the FAI handicaps discussed on another thread. That isn't a proposal, that's the rule, right now. It might be amusing to Moshe, but it's just plain idiotic to anyone with experience in handicapped comps.
There's an effort under way to rationalize the scoring of FAI comps. I think everyone agrees the current system is not a rational one. The only opposition to change comes from teams who have become proficient at exploiting the weirdness in the current system. If this passes, then my main objection to the FAI rules goes away. As far as starts, turnpoints, finishes, there are things they do better, things we do better. I would like to see our rules converge, using the best of both.
Tracking isn't rules related. Creative individuals out there doing creative stuff and I hope we see more.
Scoring results... belly laugh time: it's Soaring Spot that completely sucks. In a comp with 3 classes, the daily and cumulative results are spread over 6 pages -- a maddeningly low information density. Our results page (singular) is far superior.
Bias...? As though you have none? Another belly laugh.
In summary, most of us aren't too fussed with the rules because the rules are pretty well tuned right now. We know that -- by and large -- the same guys are going to win. The same other guys are going to invent the same excuses for not participating. There are things that could be done to change this... almost all for the worse. We could screw up the handicaps, we could insist that we call 30% ATs (which would have turned the recent R4S contest, for instance, from near idyllic into a landout nightmare), we could do away with useful things that occasionally prove exceptionally useful like the safety finish.
I think you are poking a hornets' nest to no purpose.
best,
Evan Ludeman / T8
On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 2:02:30 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> 90,
>
> I see three systemic and troubling issues with the SSA US rules system (opinion poll, RC, etc.). We have discussed these offline, and you made some strong points. Nonetheless, the current system is quite flawed (biased) if you are not part of the SSA good old boys, anti-FAI, groupthink. You made another great point that this bias is natural and difficult to purge (and bias systems do not want to be exterminated). That is the heart of the issue.
>
> MY PRIMARY CONCERN with US rules remains that doing so when the international soaring community already manages the FAI rules, is exceptionally inefficient. US rules are a HUGE waste of time when you consider a rule system is already available and is already used by the vast majority of the soaring world, right now, today. Don't we have better things to focus on?
>
> What is the value of US Rules? What do we gain by recreating and maintaining our own custom "wheels" for everything? Do we have higher contest participation? Greater safety? Higher growth? More Youth? No. No, we do not. Think about that for a moment. Despite no tangible value, we still spend the resources to manage: The US rules definitions, US Rules scoring software, US rules handicaps, SSA contest management systems (registration, etc.), SSA scoring display websites (SSA.org, SUCKS!), SSA contest reporting, SSA contest tracking, etc. Also, having our own obscure US rule system isolates our contest pilots, and our youth from the FAI raking system, contest reporting community, social media, etc.
>
> 1) The US Rules Committee has been staffed exclusively by people who genuinely believe that US rules are a better path and the FAI rules are bad. Without this general viewpoint, their election to the US RC is highly unlikely, to this day. That is a biased system.
>
> 2) The US Rules opinion poll is written by these same US rules "fans" who make it to the committee. They are inherently biased. US rules ARE DOGMA to them. Now that some pressure is on them (return to FAI makes sense to many US pilots), they are paying lip service to the FAI idea (offering a slow change option, whatever that means). I believe they are also trying to buy time to (they hope) effect change in other areas (FAI scoring, etc.). Most of the Good Old Boys do not want FAI rules. They still, in general, actively dislike the FAI and strongly prefer the power the US rules system provides them (killing technology, etc.). They even go so far as to write their own point/counterpoint addendums to many of the most controversial questions in their own poll. And as you might expect, those point/counterpoint descriptions are WAY OFF THE MARK in describing the argument for FAI rules, for no out the top start, for no extra TAT distance accumulation in ASSIGNED(?) task turns, etc. I'll point this out in a blog post I am writing, as promised. I have saved screenshots of all opinion polls that I have experienced. The examples are PLENTIFUL.
>
> 3) The same gang then "analyzes" the results and makes policy.
>
> I will continue to advocate for a better system for determining our rules direction.
>
> Sean
> 7T
>
> At a minimum, the counterpoints in the questions should be written (or linked externally) to a real argument by those who believe passionately in them. Not paraphrased by those who don't want them.
>
>
>
> On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 10:57:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 6:49:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > > Hello US competition pilots.
> > > Our annual poll about topics related to competition and associated rules is now open at http://www.adamsfive.com/a5soaring/survey/surveys.php.
> > > It is open to all pilots on the ranking list.
> > > Feedback from the poll and associated comments, as well as messages via e-mail to committee members, are the basis for our annual deliberations.
> > > Please participate and mention to your contest buddies.
> > > The poll is open until October 18th.
> > > For the RC
> > > UH
> >
> > Sean,
> > Thanks for advocating that we consider FAI rules. I was pleased to see the topic in the poll.
> >
> > If the Rules Committee is anything like the US Team Committee someone volunteers to produce the text and the committee comments on it and that's it. You get the natural bias of the individuals involved - this is normal.
> >
> > Perhaps the best way to influence this is to submit suggested poll questions to the committee during summer. I remember being polled for questions at the Uvalde rules meeting. My topics got included but I did not provide suggested question text, so some kind fellow wrote the question without my involvement. Overall it appears to be working.
> >
> > Each question has a comment box where you could suggest what the question should have been and your response. It's hard to please everyone but the comment box really helps.
> >
> > UH and Diane rescued me and my trailer from the side of a dark and rainy NJ highway on the way to Uvalde after a van fuel line failure. God bless them. This is not the behavior that I associate with some master rules plot..
> >
> > Let's try to find a positive way to encourage reasoned dialogue.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Bob Fletcher 90
Andy Blackburn[_3_]
October 8th 17, 08:53 PM
On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:02:30 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> 90,
>
> I see three systemic and troubling issues with the SSA US rules system (opinion poll, RC, etc.). We have discussed these offline, and you made some strong points. Nonetheless, the current system is quite flawed (biased) if you are not part of the SSA good old boys, anti-FAI, groupthink. You made another great point that this bias is natural and difficult to purge (and bias systems do not want to be exterminated). That is the heart of the issue.
>
Sean,
Personal comments notwithstanding, you are more than welcome to post point-by-point perspectives on any specific differences between US and FAI rules that you feel strongly about. Your fellow pilots would probably appreciate a thoughtful analysis backed up by data and experience. On the other hand, sweeping accusations about bias and conspiracy theories about "deep-state" smoke-filled rooms at SSA headquarters don't particularly advance any useful agenda or illuminate anyone's thinking - though I know some of your fellow pilots get a chuckle out of reading them.
I personally supported adding questions about FAI rules to this year's survey, not because US racing pilots (aside from you) have been clamoring for a change (they haven't), but because I felt it was worth having a discussion on the subject and getting real input. I have no particular interest in preserving the US rules as an independent structure, nor do I have a personal agenda to do away with US rules. My agenda is, first, to ensure safe and fair contest flying in the US; second, increase the participation in and enjoyment of sailplane racing in the US; and third, improve the skill and competitiveness of US racing pilots. Sean Fidler's personal agenda items don't get much attention unless they fit into one of those three.
As is always the case with questions about rules, there needs to some care taken to ensure that respondents are able to provide informed feedback. Otherwise, poll questions (as we have learned from experience) give very poor guidance as to what pilots really want, let alone how to go about it. The idea of doing a line-by-line comparison of each area of rules and a deep description of how each affects individual and group behavior and results under various scenarios, is something relatively few people are willing to endure (as evidenced by the numbers of people lining up to serve on the RC - not many).
We made an attempt over half a dozen iterations to give some flavor of the qualitative differences rule systems create in the racing experience so that pilots would be at least somewhat informed before giving input. There is no perfect way to do that - convert tens of hours of comparison and analysis into something where people can read a digestible about of material and click a response. Speaking personally, my goal was to inform not persuade respondents as I have no particular agenda one way or the other, but I do take this responsibility as one that needs sober guidance and decision-making.
Looking forward to reading you topic-by-topic analysis.
Andy Blackburn
9B
Tom Kelley #711
October 15th 17, 06:54 PM
On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 1:53:22 PM UTC-6, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:02:30 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > 90,
> >
> > I see three systemic and troubling issues with the SSA US rules system (opinion poll, RC, etc.). We have discussed these offline, and you made some strong points. Nonetheless, the current system is quite flawed (biased) if you are not part of the SSA good old boys, anti-FAI, groupthink. You made another great point that this bias is natural and difficult to purge (and bias systems do not want to be exterminated). That is the heart of the issue.
> >
>
> Sean,
>
> Personal comments notwithstanding, you are more than welcome to post point-by-point perspectives on any specific differences between US and FAI rules that you feel strongly about. Your fellow pilots would probably appreciate a thoughtful analysis backed up by data and experience. On the other hand, sweeping accusations about bias and conspiracy theories about "deep-state" smoke-filled rooms at SSA headquarters don't particularly advance any useful agenda or illuminate anyone's thinking - though I know some of your fellow pilots get a chuckle out of reading them.
>
> I personally supported adding questions about FAI rules to this year's survey, not because US racing pilots (aside from you) have been clamoring for a change (they haven't), but because I felt it was worth having a discussion on the subject and getting real input. I have no particular interest in preserving the US rules as an independent structure, nor do I have a personal agenda to do away with US rules. My agenda is, first, to ensure safe and fair contest flying in the US; second, increase the participation in and enjoyment of sailplane racing in the US; and third, improve the skill and competitiveness of US racing pilots. Sean Fidler's personal agenda items don't get much attention unless they fit into one of those three.
>
> As is always the case with questions about rules, there needs to some care taken to ensure that respondents are able to provide informed feedback. Otherwise, poll questions (as we have learned from experience) give very poor guidance as to what pilots really want, let alone how to go about it. The idea of doing a line-by-line comparison of each area of rules and a deep description of how each affects individual and group behavior and results under various scenarios, is something relatively few people are willing to endure (as evidenced by the numbers of people lining up to serve on the RC - not many).
>
> We made an attempt over half a dozen iterations to give some flavor of the qualitative differences rule systems create in the racing experience so that pilots would be at least somewhat informed before giving input. There is no perfect way to do that - convert tens of hours of comparison and analysis into something where people can read a digestible about of material and click a response. Speaking personally, my goal was to inform not persuade respondents as I have no particular agenda one way or the other, but I do take this responsibility as one that needs sober guidance and decision-making.
>
> Looking forward to reading you topic-by-topic analysis.
>
> Andy Blackburn
> 9B
The debate has started! https://seanfidler.com/2017/10/inherent-bias-us-rules-opinion-poll-part-1/
Best. Tom #711.
Andrzej Kobus
October 15th 17, 10:49 PM
On Sunday, October 15, 2017 at 1:54:27 PM UTC-4, Tom Kelley #711 wrote:
> On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 1:53:22 PM UTC-6, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:02:30 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > > 90,
> > >
> > > I see three systemic and troubling issues with the SSA US rules system (opinion poll, RC, etc.). We have discussed these offline, and you made some strong points. Nonetheless, the current system is quite flawed (biased) if you are not part of the SSA good old boys, anti-FAI, groupthink. You made another great point that this bias is natural and difficult to purge (and bias systems do not want to be exterminated). That is the heart of the issue.
> > >
> >
> > Sean,
> >
> > Personal comments notwithstanding, you are more than welcome to post point-by-point perspectives on any specific differences between US and FAI rules that you feel strongly about. Your fellow pilots would probably appreciate a thoughtful analysis backed up by data and experience. On the other hand, sweeping accusations about bias and conspiracy theories about "deep-state" smoke-filled rooms at SSA headquarters don't particularly advance any useful agenda or illuminate anyone's thinking - though I know some of your fellow pilots get a chuckle out of reading them.
> >
> > I personally supported adding questions about FAI rules to this year's survey, not because US racing pilots (aside from you) have been clamoring for a change (they haven't), but because I felt it was worth having a discussion on the subject and getting real input. I have no particular interest in preserving the US rules as an independent structure, nor do I have a personal agenda to do away with US rules. My agenda is, first, to ensure safe and fair contest flying in the US; second, increase the participation in and enjoyment of sailplane racing in the US; and third, improve the skill and competitiveness of US racing pilots. Sean Fidler's personal agenda items don't get much attention unless they fit into one of those three.
> >
> > As is always the case with questions about rules, there needs to some care taken to ensure that respondents are able to provide informed feedback. Otherwise, poll questions (as we have learned from experience) give very poor guidance as to what pilots really want, let alone how to go about it. The idea of doing a line-by-line comparison of each area of rules and a deep description of how each affects individual and group behavior and results under various scenarios, is something relatively few people are willing to endure (as evidenced by the numbers of people lining up to serve on the RC - not many).
> >
> > We made an attempt over half a dozen iterations to give some flavor of the qualitative differences rule systems create in the racing experience so that pilots would be at least somewhat informed before giving input. There is no perfect way to do that - convert tens of hours of comparison and analysis into something where people can read a digestible about of material and click a response. Speaking personally, my goal was to inform not persuade respondents as I have no particular agenda one way or the other, but I do take this responsibility as one that needs sober guidance and decision-making.
> >
> > Looking forward to reading you topic-by-topic analysis.
> >
> > Andy Blackburn
> > 9B
>
> The debate has started! https://seanfidler.com/2017/10/inherent-bias-us-rules-opinion-poll-part-1/
>
> Best. Tom #711.
I agree with Sean. Why can't the poll just ask a simple question without the highly subjective "education" included in the question? I wrote about this long time ago. The same type of questions with "appropriate education" was used for many years to delay creation of the club class.
Andrzej
October 17th 17, 01:47 PM
On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 6:49:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Hello US competition pilots.
> Our annual poll about topics related to competition and associated rules is now open at http://www.adamsfive.com/a5soaring/survey/surveys.php.
> It is open to all pilots on the ranking list.
> Feedback from the poll and associated comments, as well as messages via e-mail to committee members, are the basis for our annual deliberations.
> Please participate and mention to your contest buddies.
> The poll is open until October 18th.
> For the RC
> UH
Reminder to US competition pilots.
The poll closes in a couple of days. If you have not responded, please take the time now to provide your input. Every response counts and all comments are taken into account in the RC deliberations.
For the RC
UH
Retting
October 17th 17, 02:21 PM
UH....I can't find the poll on the SSA website.
Went under competition.....found 2016 results under the 2017 section.
Looked on main page...no luck.
R
Retting
October 17th 17, 02:26 PM
UH....I was unable to find the poll site on the SSA website. Looked under competition, main page, etc. No luck.
Would you post the address again , please.
R
Frank Whiteley
October 17th 17, 03:06 PM
On Tuesday, October 17, 2017 at 7:26:33 AM UTC-6, Retting wrote:
> UH....I was unable to find the poll site on the SSA website. Looked under competition, main page, etc. No luck.
> Would you post the address again , please.
> R
Posted to rotating news on SSA web site.
October 17th 17, 04:21 PM
On Tuesday, October 17, 2017 at 9:26:33 AM UTC-4, Retting wrote:
> UH....I was unable to find the poll site on the SSA website. Looked under competition, main page, etc. No luck.
> Would you post the address again , please.
> R
Look for link at top of this string.
Cheers
UH
Kevin Christner
October 17th 17, 08:46 PM
> 1) The US Rules Committee has been staffed exclusively by people who genuinely believe that US rules are a better path and the FAI rules are bad. Without this general viewpoint, their election to the US RC is highly unlikely, to this day. That is a biased system.
Dear Wilbur,
If the majority of pilots agreed with you they would simply elect members to the Rules Committee whose platform is "we will adopt the FAI rules" full stop. Seeing as that hasn't happened, I would proffer to you that perhaps the majority pilots believe the rules committee members have been doing a good job and they are happy with the results. Of course, you may get your wish, as your continued personal abuses of the vast majority of the soaring community may result in no one willing to take up these unpaid, thankless volunteer positions.
KJC
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.