Paul Foster wrote:
>
> Paul Foster wrote:
>
> > And what job is that? To provide a venue for a select few cars but
> > everybody else is at a huge disadvantage? This is total BS.
>
> Randy Chase claims to be an infrequent poster and comes out of "lurk
> mode" with:
Paul, you are proving yourself to really be a jerk. I have never claimed
to be an infrequent poster. I have not posted much lately. And I will
probably be posting much less.
>
> <<<This is probably the only point we will agree on, that this is total
> BS.
>
> The entire perception that the intention is to create a venue for a
> select few cars is silly, as is thinking that everyone else is at a
> *huge* disadvantage. What would be cool would be to have a good driver
> hop in one of those hugely disadvantaged cars and show you why it's more
> the driver that selects the cars than anything else. The nature of the
> sport is that some car or cars will appear to be the topdog. History has
> shown us that often there are other cars that can compete, but it takes
> someone who knows how to set them up and drive them. One reason for the
> appearance of their only being fewer top cars, is that, IMHO, there are
> just not that many good drivers, and they tend to gravitate to certain
> cars.>>>
>
> So I guess you consider Roger Johnson to be a poor Corvette driver? I
> don't know how many National Championships he has won in the same car,
> but it is a far sight more than you have won.
Ouch. I guess that has some relationship to what I said?
> > Or don't you want
> > large turnouts at your autocrosses? Maybe you like things the way they
> > are. Maybe you have a problem with 200+ people at a local autocross
> > because it means you can't make 6 runs instead of 3. Maybe you don't
> > like having 15 or so cars in your class which would provide good
> > competition and a ladder to get better.
>
> <<<And maybe you are being incredibly presumptious. Perhaps someone does
> not agree with you because they see things differently, instead of
> leaping to your conclusions?>>>
>
> Maybe I am being incredibly presumptuous. There is no way of telling
> unless we provide changes. Since most people seem too narrow minded to
> even discuss such in an open manner then I guess neither of us will ever
> know.
Right. You accuse the person who disagrees with you, as wanting less
competition or wanting fewer autocrossers, and you are saying you want
to have an open minded discussion? Frankly, I have not seen much in the
way of positive comments ever from you.
> You were so presumptuous you wrote this massive email that completely
> missed the point! Now that is what I'd call presumptuous!
Well, I guess I must be dense then. I thought you said "The SCCA
should provide fair classes for _all_ cars.." Perhaps that meant
something else than what you wrote? Frankly, your post came across as a
whiny 13 year old who didn't get his way. You can take all the shots at
me you want. I could give a rip about your opinion on anything at this
point.
Randy Chase
|