Re: BOM vs BAM

From: Mark F1diddler <f1diddler_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 01:12:57 -0000

--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> , "Mark F1diddler"
<f1diddler_at_...> wrote:
<<But nothing can come already attached
or connected to any other part in kit.>>

Oops, should include language about the (obvious to me) case of a part
being attached to itself, such as the gluing of a motor tube seam.
Consistently, under BOM proposal, a motortube could be pre-rolled, but
not pre-glued. (Yeah, like from whom.....nevertheless.)

Why all this now, anyhow? BOM revision not exactly necessary, but
preemption is good. Gripes will recur--that BOM is so unfair, so
outdated, so unenforceable, so counterproductive to growth, etc.
Therefore, let's improve it, for indoor.

We're probably due for a separately defined experimental non-BOM event,
too. Would love to behold the hundreds of new bodies clamoring to
join in (some sarcasm, but seriously.) Local club rule may suffice
there, don't know.
MB
Received on Tue Oct 23 2012 - 18:12:58 CEST

This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:47 CET