Re: Re: Wright Stuff Invitational at the USIC
Point taken and I will try to bury the hatchet (and not in someone's head!) once and for all on this subject.
And I agree with Gary - having too many participants would be a great problem to have at USIC.
----- Original Message -----
From: john_kagan
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:02 AM
Subject: [Indoor_Construction] Re: Wright Stuff Invitational at the USIC
--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, "Bill Gowen" <wdgowen_at_...> wrote:
>
> No. I'm saying that I was told it was by invitation only and no one I knew was invited.
Then I don't buy the argument. It's like saying a girl is stuck up because she won't go out with you, but then come to find that you've never actually asked her out.
How would Lindstrum, or anyone else in the Indoor FF community, know about your kids unless you said, "hey, invite these guys"?
> I was told directly by Dave Lindstrum that the invitational was to keep USIC from having a bunch of kids bothering the serious flyers - and he was one of the people who made the decision.
Poorly phrased, perhaps, but legit in concept - the idea being to keep a new kind of event under control until you see how it goes, lest it get out of hand.
The Pro/Am is different in many was, but similar in some. If we don't keep some control over the number of participants, the success of the event could be in jeopardy.
It sounds like the idea was: invitation only, but all you have to do to get an invitation is ask - up until some limit is reached (if and when).
More disturbing is the suggestion that the Smyrna group asked to participate and was told no. So disturbing, in fact, that I would need to know more about the story before I believed it. Who in the world would have told them that they couldn't fly in an event that hardly had any participants? And why?
Received on Thu Apr 29 2010 - 08:59:39 CEST
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:46 CET