Howdy,
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Karl Witt wrote:
> Kevin was within his rights as a competitor regardless of his reason for
> doing it, and it's rather disruptive of our 'self-policing' system if
> people feel they have to worry about taking heat for excersizing their
> rights. The only person kevin should have to answer to here is Katie.
I agree with you to a point, but the protest system itself is rather
disruptive. I think some restraint based on "everyone will be pissed at
me" isn't a bad thing.
Either can be taken too far. In other forms of racing I've seen people
get soundly beat on the track and then try like hell to find something
wrong with the winner's equipment solely to improve their position, not
because they think cheating was going on. I've also seen an entire group
of people "avert their eyes" and seen what happens when someone new tries
to get involved. Either case is just about equally bad.
If writing a letter doesn't generate any response and we're reduced to
protesting someone to find out what the rule is, then I agree we shouldn't
be bashing Kevin. We should be bashing the people who aren't responding
to the letter. If the answer is that they're all volunteers and can't be
held responsible, then fine. Make them not volunteers so that they can
be. Why the heck do I pay $65/year to a sanctioning body if they can't
tell me the damn rules for the events?
But I probably havne't been doing this long enough to have a right to an
opinion, so whatever. I'll keep having fun and keep not worrying about
1/8" spring perch height differences.
Mark
|