George Ryan wrote:
> Read my lips. I already have a built 2.3, and really do not prefer to
> throw another 10 grand at the car to completely tube it, and install
> a V8.
>
> This isn't an "I" class I propose, as my car is perfectly legal in AP.
> Although the car will not ever become a champion in that class,
> my driving skills (?) are a far cry from that caliber anyway (the same
> could be said of a new Mod class). At least under that proposal, my
> car and a host of other also-rans which do not really have a class
> where they fit in - the kit cars, the Corvairs, et al - could have a
> place where they could run on a little more level playing field.
>
> If that still makes no sense to you, maybe I could get someone with
> artistic skills (again, that leaves me out) to draw a picture? Instead
> of picking out one or two sentences in a message to be critical of,
> try reading the entire message for content and meaning.
George,
I read the whole message. I'm even quoting the whole thing so that no
one thinks I've done any editing.
This is the *classic* "I Class" argument! Basically, the classic
argument goes something like this: "I have an XXXXX. I love my XXXXX.
It bugs me that based on some things I've done to make my XXXXX special,
it's a really cool car, but it ends up getting classed somewhere where
I'd have to spend a whole lot more to make my car into something I won't
like as much. How come there isn't a class where my special, lovable,
and unique XXXXX isn't competitive?"
That's the I Class argument. It's also yours. If necessary, please
draw a picture. And if you don't agree that your argument is the same
as mine, please go up there and re-read it before you get combative.
Josh
|