VP For S.O. was Undercurrents of Indoor_Construction....Announcement?
Bill Gowen Wrote:
"Speaking of VP's, I remember a year or two ago that VP's were specifically banned from SO competition but I can't find any official rules that state that prohibition. Does anyone remember how that went down?"
Bill,
In few places you'd get arbitrarily DQ'd for breaking "Spirit of Rules" followed likely by "we have never allowed VP's" IMO. Would all the materials needed for VP fit into allowed list? How about wording of thrust bearing?
Mark Schaefer
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Gowen<mailto:b.gowen_at_earthlink.net>
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com<mailto:Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Indoor_Construction] Undercurrents of Indoor_Construction....Announcement?
I don't see a need for another group. There is little enough participation without diluting it further. I might occasionally be guilty of stretching the group rules, but it's usually in response to a question raised by others. It's easier to just give an answer or opinion here than directing someone to a more appropriate group, even though that might annoy someone who would only like to read about the latest thinking in VP spring design.
Speaking of VP's, I remember a year or two ago that VP's were specifically banned from SO competition but I can't find any official rules that state that prohibition. Does anyone remember how that went down?
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com<mailto:Indoor_Construction%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 2:27 AM
Subject: [Indoor_Construction] Undercurrents of Indoor_Construction....Announcement?
I believe that good online groups such as this one have two
overlapping constituencies--two good motives to join and
participate. One is for relevant, current, or rare information about
the hobby, the other for social interaction--to enjoy the feeling of
belonging among FF friends. Indoorists are normally flung far and
wide from each other geographically, so the ersatz-clubhouse function
provided by online chat may be more important than we suppose. The
informational aspect sometimes becomes merely the backdrop or
premise for a major reason people check in--being to talk, or read
others' talk. The two motives aren't mutually exclusive, of course,
and can coexist. However the narrowness of the topic "Indoor Free
Flight" (or my interpretation of what that means) has probably
minimized the "social need" facet. I sometimes sense good members
chomping at the bit, or outright rattling my cage to just talk about
*whatever* in the absence of real news or indoor substance. Me, I'm
now FINE when days or a week go by without a post--or at least that's
to be preferred to off-topic posts (which seldom appear,
thankfully .) But some disagree, and they understandably crave
action, any kind. So, I get occasionally chided as a boogeyman of
sorts, or ready to have a cow in front of everyone. Not exactly
true--I don't mind being a diligent moderator, which includes a
police function, but I do resent the periodic references to me
being "about ready to get mad" at someone, or the like. I don't get
mad, I draw lines. Please, just take it like a man, without blaming
me! (Notable exception--I got mad and therefore started Ind_Const.
Group due to Off-topic disregard shown in previous group.) I
digress.
Anyhow, I propose to set up a sort of Sister Station to
Indoor_Construction, maybe called Coffee Shop Indoor. I suggest not
having limiting rules about content--only normal civility, if that
can exist. It's very possible that just as much or more good indoor
discussion can arise or be imbedded within the way indoorists talk
when they/we gather for coffee and breakfast just before a flying day
at Kibbie Dome, for example. I will_not_be THE moderator or even a
moderator for Indoor Coffee Shop so I'm open to suggestions.
Where would this leave Indoor_Constuction? It probably will risk
being buried or whithering away. But hopefully those who have always
appreciated the (beautiful) narrowness of Indoor_Construction can
help keep it alive with their own regular posts, and also I'll try to
talk someone(s) into copy-pasting any relevant indoor content that
may appear in the proposed sister station. Maybe I'll do that part
myself for a little while. Then, what happens, happens.
Regular posters please PM me with your thoughts about this.
Mark F1diddler
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Received on Sat Sep 29 2007 - 07:31:37 CEST
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:45 CET