In a message dated 2/26/04 10:25:27 PM Pacific Standard Time,
drmiller100@hotmail.com writes:
> So a couple of things. First and foremost, I'm on digest, so I responded as
> soon as I saw the mistake made by smokerbros.
I apologize for my error...
> Second, it is truly fascinating how smokerbros seems bent on totally
> SQUASHING all discussion of the proposed changes.
Discussion of proposed changes? If you want something changed, write the
SEB. But be prepared to tell them how a competitor who suspects someone of
cheating is supposed to proceed, and why it's better than the current system.
Currently, one has to bring documentation to defend him/herself in the event of
protest. Making the protestor document everything causes him/her to have to
bring documentation on what is legal for every car in the class. If you are
second at the Nationals, and are sure the one rare vehicle in front of you (one
of
which you've never seen before in your life) is cheating, should you be
required to have his documentation? If you answer "yes", then you've just
opened
the door for cheaters because they'll get away with it a lot more often.
> Third, I wrote the below comments, not bhaden.
>
My apologies.
> I raced oval track for a period of time. The tear down bond of SCCA is
> miniscule. The bad will and bad thoughts and excuses for not stepping up and
> putting their reputations where their mouths are is immense if allowed
> excuse.
I've been involved in setting teardown bonds and inspecting protested
vehicles at the Nationals for some time, and the teardown bonds are fair. Tell
me a
specific instance where it wasn't fair...
The system works as it is. Maybe the wording as to required documentation in
Prepared Category needs some work, but the protest/appeal system is fine in
my opinion.
Charlie Davis
|