All,
Thanks for participating in the vote on permanent certifications. The thread seems to have gone off topic so I thought I would give my assessment. My curiosity is satisfied.
I don't know what the tally is so far, but there were clearly many more "No"s (keep cert procedure dependent on membership) than "Yes"s (make certs permanent). I was puzzled by this. Why do people want more regulation instead of less regulation? Finally a "No" voter explained the situation to me in private email. Political RMR posts are seen by many (most?) as either "supportive of the rocketry organizations" or "whining about the rocketry organizations". So really the vote morphed into the question "do you support the rocketry organizations?" ("No" vote being you do support the rocketry organizations). Seen in this light, the results make perfect sense.
Another way the vote was skewed is the fact that many of the voters are "hardcore" rocketeers, meaning they fly as often as possible and are probably officers in their local section or prefecture. They don't go in and out of participation in the hobby. But, I suspect the majority of rocketeers don't read RMR and don't fall into this category. I, for example, can easily see myself leaving the hobby for a couple of years and then when my brother visits me he'll see one of my old rockets in the garage and ask to see it fly. That would be a situation where it would be alot of fun for us to drive to a local launch, pay the necessary dues and flight fees, and watch the rocket fly. It would be absolutely no fun, ie, it would be a show stopper, if I had to go through a bunch of bureaucratic nonsense (recerting L1, L2, L3, tap members, written tests, etc. etc.) just so me and my brother could have a good time seeing one of my old rockets fly. I suspect there are alot of LX rocketeers that have been out of it for awhile, and are put in the exact position above, but don't go fly with their family/friend because of the above (unnecessary) hassles.
So I guess I would like all the "No" voters to consider the following question. Assume that certifications had always been permanent. The national orgs were happy providing this service. In this scenario, would you submit a proposal to the NAR BOT asking that all LX rocketeers that are no longer members of NAR have their certifications removed and have their ability to buy HPR motors revoked. And if they wanted to rejoin NAR, they would have to go through the cert process again. If you don't think you would go out of your way to lobby NAR to change in this fashion then I don't think you are a "No" voter.
OTOH, I have gone out of my way to submit a proposal to the NAR BOT. It is that the cert procedure stay exactly the way it is, ie, you need to be a NAR member to show the necessary basic competence, but once a cert level has been passed then that is it, you will not have to recertify again. So you can legally purchase HPR motors. The belief that a mere lapse of membership implies a person loses that basic competence is ludicrous.
I have a great deal of faith in people. I think the NAR will change this policy when the BOT meets again this summer. I think the BOT will agree that extortion is not the proper way to gain membership. Indeed, I think a change of policy will bring back many lapsed HPR flyers. And thus, NAR membership will increase. NAR does have a very good "value proposition" irregardless of the cert issue.
Less regulation and fewer barriers to participation are what will keep the rocketry hobby thriving.
Take care,
Ferrell Wheeler Sunderland, MD