Rule Book Proposals

Discussion in 'Rule Book Proposals' started by ken lalonde, Nov 9, 2013.

  1. ken lalonde

    ken lalonde New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rider must have completed 1 season (within the last 5 years) in the class that they proposal rule changes for. Novice classes are not part of this rule.
     
  2. cookie

    cookie Two Smokin'

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rationale for this proposed rule change?
     
  3. Dean

    Dean Just a beer league racer

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,779
    Likes Received:
    1
    I would think the rationale would be "Those who have not lived it, should not be making changes to something they know nothing about". Seems to prevent change for the cause of change.
     
  4. cookie

    cookie Two Smokin'

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sounds like those voting on changes should be pre-qualified too then.

    It's ridiculous. There is to be an open discussion on the forum, followed by an internet vote, yet you will require that a person making a proposal is "qualified"? Seems to me that a ridiculous proposed change, not supported by the membership, will quickly be exposed.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2013
  5. Dean

    Dean Just a beer league racer

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,779
    Likes Received:
    1
    You have a valid point, but I think it was to prevent changes to technical rules without first having had experience in that class. Maybe to prevent a superbike rider from proposing 140HP limits in supersport so that he can get his bike eligible to race in that class, where everyone else was happy with the 125HP limits. Since the superbike rider had never been in that class, then his proposals for that class should not be made?

    At any rate, with internet votes and discuss, that crap should be weeded out pretty fast too. However, like with any vote, it can be manipulated. All it takes is one or two motivated individuals to ask their friends to vote to support their cause, even for changes like the one above. In that case, we all fail and have popularity rules and not rules that really support the community at large. Sadly, there is a LOT of our membership that is not online, don't use facebook, twitter, forums, etc. I'd say we are close to maybe 1/3 of the membership.
     
  6. cookie

    cookie Two Smokin'

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    So write the rules to provide what the club and it's membership needs. Put a process in place to ensure that frivolous and self serving rules cannot be implemented while providing the membership with a productive way to participate. If internet voting is not a realistic option for this group then have the membership choose the rulebook committee at the AGM in a fair and open election. Those elected would then be accountable to the membership. Make rules that are INCLUSIVE, democratic and promote participation rather than ones that exclude people and promote elitism. I think it's also important to note that the APPEARANCE of a fair process is every bit as important as the fact of a fair process.
     
  7. bsa_414

    bsa_414 WMRC Formula Classic Rep

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    glad to see that you are still around...

    I was starting to wonder by your marked absence from the AGM, and the banquet.... (LOL - yes I know, holidays and emergency stuff) , but i'm glad you piped up! It wouldn't be fun otherwise!

    Please answer a couple of questions about this rule book proposal:

    1. How do you feel about what John Cathie mentioned in another thread? "...stuff about no other people have thought about..."?

    2. Please clarify 'must have completed'. Do I just show up on the grid once? Do I have to complete a certain amount of races/laps? Do I have to have a required 'best' lap time before I can propose a rule change for the class? What if it's my 'bump up' class? Can I still contribute?

    No offense Ken, but I think most of my proposed rule changes promote fairness in racing (and in the pocketbook), democracy, and transparency in the rule book change process.
    And I put them out in the open before our memebers. Something we haven't had in the club for a long time.

    We've alienated a lot of members (AND SPONSORS) over the past few years, our grids have been declining, and the time has come to make everything right again. We're not MotoGP. We're a rinky dink club, on a track that's slightly bigger than a parking lot. We're people that are brought toghether by one common thing - motorcycle racing. Our strength is our general membership.... Let's preserve and grow that.

    cheers
    alex
     
  8. Dean

    Dean Just a beer league racer

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,779
    Likes Received:
    1
    I agree with you 100% about preserving and growing our membership, but I've head that we've alienated a *lot* of members (AND SPONSORS) over the past few years. Everytime I hear this statement, people do not back it up. Can you please back this up? Which members and sponsors have we alienated and lost over the years? I've been on the exec for the last 9 years, and would really like to know.
     
  9. bsa_414

    bsa_414 WMRC Formula Classic Rep

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dean,

    I will back this up. It will take me quite a few days to contact past members and get their consent to publicly post their names, but I will do it. If they are active on the forums, I would like them to speak up...

    regards
    alex
     
  10. Ryan Whittle

    Ryan Whittle Rider of Orange V-Twins

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2005
    Messages:
    539
    Likes Received:
    2
    I wouldn't be in support of this change. Who cares who proposes it, just have a membership vote and be done with it.

    If there was something that would be highly controversial, say for example allowing 2006 and older bikes to run vintage, I think the rules committee would have a role in preventing such an obvious violation of the spirit of the rules. There could be enough racers who would vote to allow such a change, but to enact it would defeat the purpose of vintage.

    I assume it is situations such as the above that Ken would want to keep a lid on.
     

Share This Page