Re: Re: Exact Builder of Model Rule

From: <f1diddler_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 06 Feb 2014 10:11:34 -0800

 <<Mark's proposal does not address the issue of purchased parts providing a true relief from the current BOM rules. >>
 

 The intention is not relief from the PRACTICE of BOM. But current RULE (definition) of BOM is another issue. There's no such thing as "an average kit" with indoor, nor the "time required to complete" such. Defacto BOM exists right now due to our own indoor culture, and not due to AMA BOM.
 

  <<Rolling a tube or bending balsa outlines is not the hard part. The hard part is the assembly.>>
 

 Bingo. So, getting front of history (ie, the eventual deletion of indoor AMA BOM) may extend the cause of AMA BOM lovers. Enforcement is not really the issue, compared with mere DEFINITION. Give modelers and newbies simple and good definition, and compliance will be naturally enhanced, for all except the 1% we can't catch cheating anyhow. So since we don't have 100 indoorists, the odds look good. "Less than an indoorist will cheat." .
 

 Nevertheless, may the true stakeholders (future competitors) have their way in this.
 Mark B
Received on Thu Feb 06 2014 - 10:11:34 CET