autox
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: SCCA national office move

To: "'Rick Cone'" <rickcone@bellsouth.net>,
Subject: RE: SCCA national office move
From: James Gunn-Wilkinson <jgunn@genoptix.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:24:53 -0700
Here's a thought, Let's have a Western US championship.  We all know the
real competition is out here anyway :-) 



James

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Cone [mailto:rickcone@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 1:06 PM
To: Kevin Stevens
Cc: Rex Tener; bthatch@juno.com; autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: SCCA national office move


It's also better form to put your replies at the beginning of a thread
versus the end. :)

> The problem with basing location on where the membership lives is that it
> is much less of a hardship, individually, for all the east coast people to
> drive an additional two hundred miles than it is for any of the west coast
> people to drive an additional 1000-1500 miles.  As I posted following Mark
> Sirota's comment on population center, "efficient" doesn't mean "fair".

I would disagree whole heartedly, and fair is relative to he/she that thinks
is getting the short end of the stick.  And NO ONE on the west coast would
have to drive an additional 1500 miles.

See Here:

Seattle to Birmingham would be an extra 750 miles, its only an extra 500 for
LA, San Fran come in at about 100.  Meanwhile those in NYC drop 300 miles,
Miami drops 900 miles and Atlanta drops 700 miles.  The number of people
competing in Nationals in the SEDIV and NEDIV are pretty close.  So adding
750 to Seattle and dropping between 700-900 miles for those in the SEDIV are
about the same.

Nationals should be centrally located for the most members.  The fact is
don't matter how you cut it up, those on the west coast need 2 days to get
to Topeka or Birmingham and those on the East only need one. (Except for
Miami, and Maine)  As long as everyone has to make the same time commitment
to get to Nationals, we should locate it for maximum attendance.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Stevens" <Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net>
To: "Rick Cone" <rickcone@bellsouth.net>
Cc: "Rex Tener" <rex_tener@yahoo.com>; <bthatch@juno.com>;
<autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: SCCA national office move


> On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Rick Cone wrote:
>
> > I am afraid Rex, it may be you joking, statistically anyway.
> >
> > According to the most recent US Census...
> > http://www.census.gov/geo/www/cenpop/cntpop2k.html
> >
> > The median center of population in the US is........... Evansville, IN!
Ok
> > not quite but it is the next big city to the center.
> >
> > Due south of Evansville.... BIRMINGHAM AL....
> >
> > So using your numbers... If the offices were moved to the middle of the
> > country, in terms of population) then you would have to drive 1852 (your
> > number) + 342 (yahoo maps, Evansville to Topeka) for a total of 2194
miles.
> > So it would be another 100 miles to get to Birmingham.
> >
> > IF we move the location of the Solo2 Nationals, we should do it based
upon
> > the geographic center of our membership.  And I would contend if you
> > compared the geographics of the SCCA and the US Population as a whole
the
> > center would move south, and east.  Why?  It would move south because we
are
> > able to race close to year round, and our member to population rates
will be
> > higher.  (How many SCCA members are there that live/work in Manhattan?
I
> > would bet that Atlanta being a city 1/5 the size has more members then
New
> > York City... see what I mean?  To further illustrate, 6 of the SCCA's
area
> > is East of the Mississippi.
> >
> > You could make a point that those of us east of Topeka, subsidizes those
> > coming from the west.
> >
> > I'm all for Solo 2 Nationals being centrally located, or in the central
part
> > of the country.  But it should be based on where the membership lives.
>
> It's better form to put your assumptions at the beginning of your argument
> rather than the end.  Basing the location near the population center
> (of SCCA membership, which may not be the same thing as the general
> population) is most efficient in terms of total travel miles.
>
> The problem with basing location on where the membership lives is that it
> is much less of a hardship, individually, for all the east coast people to
> drive an additional two hundred miles than it is for any of the west coast
> people to drive an additional 1000-1500 miles.  As I posted following Mark
> Sirota's comment on population center, "efficient" doesn't mean "fair".
>
> KeS
>
> ///          autox@autox.team.net mailing list
> ///
> ///  To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
> ///  with nothing in it but
> ///
> ///     unsubscribe autox
> ///

///          autox@autox.team.net mailing list
///
///  To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
///  with nothing in it but
///
///     unsubscribe autox
///

///          autox@autox.team.net mailing list
///
///  To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
///  with nothing in it but
///
///     unsubscribe autox
///


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>