I don't think there's antway to avoid voting on the proposal. This will be
done by the indoor contest buard. I f you have opinions one way or the
other then you need to bend the ear of your contest board representative.
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 8:05 PM, joshuawfinn_at_gmail.com
[Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> Don,
>
> My opinion is that more research needs to be done. The discussion thus
> far has revealed potential deficiencies in the definition of the event. It
> should remain unofficial at least until those issues are addressed. The
> proposers did not consult the rest of the indoor community, so these issues
> are predictable just like what happened with the F1D rules change proposal
> in 2014.
>
> If we as an indoor community do indeed want a serious beginner's event in
> a heavier weight class, there needs to be more research (see, Don DeLoach,
> I'm not in complete opposition to the idea!). I still say a more open-ended
> event is a better idea. We're pulling kids in three different
> directions--TSA has their event, and SO has theirs which changes annually
> (and currently has a terrible awful no good set of rules).
>
> So. Let's have P-18 at the nats, and let's wait on the rules proposal.
> Revisit when this has been hashed out fully.
>
> -Joshua Finn
>
>
>
Received on Sun Feb 14 2016 - 17:10:59 CET
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:48 CET