I don't disagree with your sentiment, Ben. Just wanted folks to be clear on
what to expect so there is no confusion and no disappointment ("Hey, we got
this petition with 8,000 signatures, so we get our class now, right?").
SM2 will get treated just like STS, STR, SM, etc. Those classes were all
supplemental for a couple of years until they showed consistency of support.
Or, in the case of STR, the lack of consistency of support. STS and SM got
made "real", while STR was shown the door. All of your comments about SM2
at this early stage in its life cycle could be said about STR at that same
relative time, but it did not pan out. And there's F125 which still
languishes in classing Purgatory. Which will SM2 be most like in the long
run, SM/STS or STR, or even F125? Only time will tell. I have my opnion
and its probably a lot like yours. But until it pans out, its just an
opinion/prediction...
--Andy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bthatch@juno.com [mailto:bthatch@juno.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 5:10 PM
> To: awhollis@swbell.net
> Cc: evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com; autox@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [evolution-disc.] SM2@25 now
>
>
> Andy, I fully expect the numbers in SM2 to build from here on out, just
> like SM did a couple years ago. This year was just too soon to see any
> significant numbers due to the temporary nature of a "supplemental"
> class. The wise and frugal driver won't pour development time and money
> into a project that has a fair chance of NOT being approved as a national
> class. That is the "Catch-22" of a "proposed" class.
>
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 16:30:18 -0500 Andy Hollis <awhollis@swbell.net>
> writes:
> > AFAIK, the only real "procedure" is for the class to continually show
> > significant subscription numbers. Helps if that happens throughout
> > the
> > country, but especially important is Nats and other nationals
> > events. At
> > the end of the day (or year, or decade), the SEB will eventually
> > make this
> > call when the preponderance of evidence suggests that its
> > appropriate. I
> > would not expect it to happen after the first year, though.
> >
> > The only "rule" has been the one for when a new supplemental class
> > gets
> > broken out into its own supplemental class, which it looks like SM2
> > and STX
> > have both done this year.
> >
> > --Andy
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: bthatch@juno.com [mailto:bthatch@juno.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 4:03 PM
> > > To: washburn@dwave.net
> > > Cc: evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com; autox@autox.team.net
> > > Subject: Re: [evolution-disc.] SM2@25 now
> > >
> > >
> > > Just that Jean said that was the procedure we need to follow to
> > get the
> > > class approved.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 11:45:24 -0500 "Patrick Washburn"
> > > <washburn@dwave.net> writes:
> > > > Why do you need a petition? Isn't it already on the table as a
> > > > provisional
> > > > class with rules that will allow it to become a full class?
> >
> >
>
> Ben Thatcher
> http://ApexBenefits.biz
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
> 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/MVfIAA/7_TolB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> evolution-discussions-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|