action: clean house

So, Izzy,

Would your "new TRA" answer questions like I asked you about ARSA, or not?

I find it so very interesting that you won't answer even the most basic questions about ARSA, even though you are the "communications facilitator" (your term) for ARSA.

- George Gassaway

----------- repeat of questions that Izzy refused to answer

Izzy,

I?ve had some problems locating some things on the ARSA website.

Where can I find the ARSA by-laws?

Where can I find any information as to when/where ARSA was officially created as regards public/state (or federal?) documentation or recognition?

Where can I find info on when the last ARSA election was held, and who ran?

Where can I find info on when the next ARSA election will be held?

Where can I find a list of who is on the ARSA board, which positions are held by what people, and how does the ARSA board operate if for some reason the ARSA by-laws website link didn?t load?

As ARSA communications facilitator, I?m sure you won?t mind answering these.

- George Gassaway

you did mean "without", didn't you?

- iz

RayDunak> Iz asked:

an off-topic, attempt to impede a open inquiry into whats possible for rocketry and rocketers in an desperate attempt to prevent reflection on and contrasts with your ineffectiveness

I answered your transparent questions

- iz

GCGassaway wrote:

Just for the record, I have no dog in this hunt. I am not now, nor have I ever been, a TRA member. I have been called a NAR apologist.

If I recall my ancient history correctly, TRA was formed because the NAR would not recognize HPR. TRA was considered the "outlaws" of rocketry for a while. Eventually the NAR saw the light and embraced HPR (to the point that some members now complain it is spending TOO much resources on HPR). Now I see reference to NAR/TRA as if they were a single organization. Maybe they should be.

A few radical thoughts.

1. Do we really need 2 national organizations?

1a What does TRA provide that NAR doesn't (EX and an easier L3 process is all I can see) 1b What does NAR provide that TRA doesn't (start with a magazine!) 1c Where do the organizations overlap?

1. Do we have the right 2 organizations?
2. Does ARSA have a place in Hobby Rocketry? If so, what? If not, why?

I suspect that the vast majority of people in this hobby don't care one bit about organizational politics. All they want to do is enjoy the hobby. To them, the primary role of the national organizations is to provide insurance.

Differecnces-

Weenies

Rocket Competition

When I got my L3, I tried to do it with NAR. The hard part was finding a CC Member. That's been fixed so it's not harder.

It's not up to you or I to decide weather there shold be 2 organizations. All members & DoD / BoT are involved.

All organizations need to evolve. I think TRA & NAR need stay freah & should have term limits for board members.

Phil Ste>Just for the record, I have no dog in this hunt. I am not now, nor have I

Phil Stein

No.

Better mismanagement and crime.

Credibility. Better stodginess.

MR HPR NFPA Motors Consumercerts

Illegally assuming jurisdiction for ATF,DOT,CPSC.

They both are mismanaged, suck hard, and keep industry participation DOWN to low manageable levels for propoganda campaigns

Non-profits are limited in lobbying.

ARSA is not a non-profit corporation and can lobby all it wants.

If that is the case why do NAR and TRA focus so much on organizational politics and so little on new members and increasing access to rockets generally?

Seriously.

Jerry

sorry for the misunderstanding

later, after a period of intolerance for "EX", TRA created their own [limited] "EX" program (vis. a vis. propellants), and the NAR BoD rejected a proposal that they follow suit. So we have come full circle.

I believe that the limitations TRA puts on its EX practices are a function of (real or imagined) NFPA rules, and/or insurance considerations.

[ I know Jerry says "EX" is a TRA distinction, all motor-making is "amateur rocketry" ] ;)

I recall a thread a few months back where we posed that question to Bunnie. I don't recall his response (if any). If I were to try to speculate what objections they might have, I would think that

1. NARS BoD considers TRA to have reset their "outlaw" status by creating a [limited] "EX" program,
2. NAR would like to maintain its distance from TRA's "problems", whatever they might perceive them to be, not wanting perhaps to have allegations of TRA impropriety subsequently reflect on NAR.
3. the NAR BoD and/or membership considers its predominantly MR culture as philosophically different than TRA, with its practically exclusive HPR culture, and vice versa
4. if they merged, how would they handle the TRA exiles who are NAR members in good standing ;)

I have seen rocketers from a number of camps (MR to "high end" Amateur) suggest that insurance and site management would be easier if there were

2 to 3 different organizations (MR, HPR, EX/AM). They observe that many MR flyers are happy to build kits and be relatively casual around relatively harmless models (how much damage can a 2 oz rocket do to a car?) and would not be inclined to practice a higher level of "professionalism" (their words) around the potentially more dangerous EX/AM rockets, which would make it difficult to get voluntary compliance with launch site decorum and protocol. Their are some AMers would be horrified at the prospect of having a social club atmosphere around AM rockets and fuels.

yep, and a fair amount of resentment

the affable Mark Bundick, of course! and that classic logo ;)

primarily HPR, but every TRA launch I ever attended has a couple of racks for MR (which I like). I don't any high end HPR at NAR launches due to siye and waiver limitations.

I don't hear that much dissatisfaction about NAR (other than legal/legislative performance or support issues), but then NAR does not have the trans-club communication channel TRA has with its list serv (except for NAR section leaders).

the dissatisfaction I hear about TRA is about the same ol same ol: (BTW, this is NOT derived from confidential listserv communications)

- HPR magazine

- unresponsiveness to JW's calls for a united front

- Bruce Kelly's personality online

- BoD's failure to consult the membership

- BoD's failure to keep the membership informed (although there has been some improvement in this area over the past 6 months)

- overly restrictive launch policies

- arbitrary and capricious suspension of memberships

- arbitrary and capricious lack of coorperation with motor vendors

- failure to attract (and retain) members

- questionable use of funds

if you mean do they have a spectrum of rocketry activities that include MR, the answer is yes, from

:

"The Amateur Rocketry Society of America's (ARSA) goal is to enable US citizens to enjoy all forms of amateur rocketry. Our local societies permit amateur rockets to fly along side high power and model rockets at the same site and at the same time"

apart from that I will abstain due to my profound bias (and enthusiasm) for what is in my opinion a very no-nonsense philosopy and practice.

from

:

"There are only two requirements for affiliation: (1) follow the ARSA safety code and (2) amateur and commercial motors must be permitted to fly together a launch."

from

:

"A safety code has been developed to permit the widest possible range of experimentation by amateurs. Some of the major differences with other rocketry organizations (1) there is no certification of members, (2) commercial and experimental motors are permitted at the same launches, (3) all experimental motors can be permitted to fly at a launch and (4) there is no certification of motors"

with the safety code at

EXACTLY! I couldn't agree more!

unfortunately, right now enjoying the hobby entails defending the hobby, which is the biggest obstacle to the "enjoyment" part.

collective bargaining for insurance based on a large membership is key

- iz

it is an inquiry. He can ask any (theoretical) question he wants, and especially those that will provoke thought. Sometimes the exercise, even if resulting in the same conclusion that reflects the current situation, is useful to gain a better appreciation for what you have. Other times it helps you clarify your own concerns and empower your own choices. If members de-select themselves from an organization en masse, the BoD will not have very much of an organization to make [unilateral] decisiosn about.

I agree, retroactive. All positions held beyond 2 terms should be expired immediately.

- iz

snip

Phil Stein

Most or nearly all. At least DURING rocket operations.

But that is not why since such communication happens on rmr, ROL and ROL chat.

Jerry

Please spell the name right. BTW, I recall no such thread.

You could also just ask, instead of speculating.

I have repeatedly stated in this and other forums that I hear no such dissatistfaction. Persons wishing to express such dissatisfaction can reach me at either:

president at nar dot org

or

mbundick at earthlink dot net

/observational rant mode on

I am simultaneously amused and bewildered by the postings here relative to the operation and management of non profits. I don't necessarily expect posters here to necessarily be students of business management to the same degree that I am, but the lack of even the most rudementary understanding of how non profit organizations can and should be managed (at least according to best practices recognized by many leading non profits) and the lack of any background research into the topic before posting here is nothing short of astounding.

If we built rockets with the same level of rigor with as the discussions of non profit organizations and their management here do, nothing would get off the pad.

/observational rant mode off

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Mark B. Bundick mbundick - at - earthlink - dot - net NAR President www - dot - nar - dot - org

"There is a very fine line between ?hobby? and ?mental illness'."

Too bad you did not list a single example of what you are ranting about.

Or 10.

Jerry

Mark B. Bundick honored be by replying to my post with:

Bunny? You actually read every single message in every single thread?! I'm truly impressed

I forgot what we were talking about. Could you remind me? (its a consequence of inadequately quoting that which you are responding to)

yes, thats what I said

gee, I thought it was reasonable to expect non proit organizations to be managed honestly, in part by refraining from fraud and embezzlement

(I'm not talking about NAR, Bunny)

apparently the rigor with which some organizations are run is insufficient to enable it to faithfully represent the interests of its members

(I'm not talking about NAR, Bunny)

so, did you want to respond substantively to the original thread?

should TRA and NAR become (or be superseded by) a single organization state your opinion with reasons

but please try to offer more substance than you did to my request for John Kyte's measurable results

- iz

Iz wrote:

I think so, yes. If anything, it gives malcontents a place to go. If you don't like NAR, you can join TRA; and if you don't like TRA, you can join NAR. Besides, there are several subtle differences in the two organizations. To some, these difference may not seem important but to others they might be very important.

I would say there are two primary roles: Providing insurance, and providing representation/collective bargaining in the regulatory process. Personally, I think the second is far more important than the insurance.

You misunderstood my use of the word "right". Let me restate: Do we have the correct 2 organizations?

Regard>

Iz wrote:

Which is one reason why I feel that regulatory relief is more important than insurance. The other is that we don't all need the insurance, but we all need or want regulatory relief.

He's the one that brought the SEA/HSA issue to Sen. Enzi's attention in the first place...

-dave w