Mark,
I originally voted no on both. After voting I observed that several fliers had voted yes on the 50% stab rule, ONLY. The 50% rule has been in some rules & not others. I don't have a strong feeling about it one way or the other. Since it was already in Don's proposal (as is paper, only) I thought it might make sense to change my vote to support the 50% rule. I didn't see the change the way you are interperting it. I know you will find this hard to believe, but I was only trying to be practical/accomodating, where possible. I could change my vote on the stab again, but then you would accuse me of doing a double flip flop! Maybe that would get me a higher degree of difficulty in voting, if voting were a judged event!
Gary Hodson
-----Original Message----t
From: Mark F1diddler <f1diddler_at_yahoo.com>
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 10:15 am
Subject: [Indoor_Construction] Re: A-6 poll update
--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, Warthodson_at_... wrote:
>
>
>
> I assumed that a vote for allowing the 50% stab rule only meant you were also voting to not change the covering.>>
Gary Hodson
>
Gary,
Since the above was your vote, I gotta hassle you. Your argument has been a constant "Don't Change What Has WORKED this far". Doesn't matter if something might/will/should work better for more "novices"--you warn against any change, even down to your fear that crinkled c-paper may not glide as well as equal weight/equal structure plastic covering.
Fair enough, non-compromise can have its place at times. Obviously your and your friends' great flying models already fit the 50% limitation proposal. And you vote to change the rules to enshrine this limitation. But the tail *permissive* rules are part and parcel of the allure that made A6 so "good" up to now. What happened to "Dance with the Lady that Brought ya," principle now?
Mark B
Received on Sat Feb 06 2010 - 09:02:46 CET
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:46 CET