Re: The AT auction

well name them Jerry and for what cause... shockie B)

Johnson for flying a non-model rocket after a NAR contest was over for a couple hours (NAR 3/48 rule added as a direct result)

Myself for "letting that happen".

Kline for a Dragon. Wanna see a picture? Email me! Dragons **DO** rule the skies!

Hope this helps.

jerry: your examples of people getting booted from the NAR are at least

10-15 years old....and on top of that I notice that you are currently a member...

I don't think anybody has been explicitly kicked out in the past 10 years or so that the pledge has been active.....if anything the NAR has gone out of its way to look the other way and its MOOT now anyway as the NAR BOT has explicitly stated that they could care less what you do outside of model or high power rocketry..... shockie B)

As usual, you are ignorant of the facts..

Naturally your conclusion sans facts is conclusive.

I agree.

Not that I am aware of. TRA has taken up that mantle.

Again I agree.

Jerry

Jerry, At least I have no delusions of the facts, as your continued delusional denial of your legal responsibility to DOT. Maybe you are just a liar; see below.

"It is now my understanding, Mr. Irvine is still claiming no response from you or your office. I find it difficult to believe Mr. Irvine has complied with the instructions provided him, with no response from your office, unless he is taking liberties with the truth, there are problems he has failed to disclose, resulting in a delay in a response from you or your office, and or both. As a result of my cynical opinion, I told my fellow board member; " If Mr. Irvine wanted, I would hand deliver the document copies to your office or fax them to you". To my surprise, Mr. Irvine told my fellow board member, he had no problem with me doing either. So, as I am a man of my word, attachment 2, of which there are 6 pages, is attached. It includes all document pages Mr. Irvine claims to have faxed to you at your office."

NOTE; Complete paragraph and in context, shall I post the complete letter and package, faxed to DOT, at your request?? I found everything in my archived files.

Fred

I guess I was right all along, you must be delusional..

You are a hateful little man.

I will subponea it.

Care to discuss how the EXACT quote is in any way inaccurate or misleading. THAT post would be interesting indeed.

Do that and I will actually TRY to get you some H160's.

Jerry

[whether] "Mr. Irvine has complied with the instructions provided him, with no response from your office unless he has taken liberties with the truth, there are problems he has failed to disclose, resulting in a delay in the response from you or your office, and or both."

- W.E. "Fred" Wallace, MDRA 6-26-01 letter to DOT

Know you won't; you havn't the balls. You are all talk and no action. However, if you would like, I can do a complete ABMR posting; the complete package, including emails between you and I, etc., etc. Would you like that, Hu, Hu, Hu?? i know there are a lot of folks that would like to read the details. Ah f#$K, check ABMR tomorrow or latter in the week, it will be there.

You did not include the complete paragraph, which is misleading and changed the context of the complete paragraph. You have done that before, when quoting from emails I sent you: I.E., the reason I will no longer communicate with you via email. You are a conniving little liar and I don't trust you.

Yea right....

Fred

Nope. For one thing there are commercial in confidence details in that. Also you have a duty of care I am specifically asking you NOT to breach.

All I am asking is how?

I will be glad to justify the "why" in email if you ever reinstate that channel.

I am trying to establish a basis for trust, however small and token initially.

thanks, John

I clarified my proposal to Mark Bundick, described in another post

an EX afficionado on the NAR BoT has got to be a good thing :)

- iz

what? exploit exemptions in the NFPA codes?

I thought only TRA could do that (in NFPA 1122)

- iz ;)

be that as it may, your agreement with Rays demonstrated disregard (disdain) for the concerns of prospective members does not reflect the commitment you stated

working "within the system" does not preclude consideration of the concerns of prospective members, but the disregard (disdain) for their concerns is not conducive to reform

- iz

Iz, the individual I was responding to stated that he had no intention of joining either org, so he was not a "prospective member". Furthermore, no organization will ever be able to please everyone, nor should they try. There will always be a few individuals who have unrealistic demands and expectations. They'd be better off elsewhere, either doing some form of independent rocketry, starting their own org, or finding another hobby.

what Duane said was "I am fairly sure I will never join, as I am fairly sure TRA will not come to terms with reality and make significant progress enough for me to consider it.", indicating his pessimism, not his preference WRT outcome

what constitutes unrealistic is subject to debate

Duane again,

"What some call destroying, others call changing for the better. But change is rarely painless... or choose not to change, and dwindle in disbelief, blaming all those complainers out there for breaking things, when in reality, it is the inflexibility and turf-guarding of the groups that is choking themselves."

Duane eloquently expresses his position

"And I personally disagree with your supposition that one must leave to effect a change. It only serves to illustrate how unweildy and inflexible the program has become."

a position which I and others share

Duane Phillips's 2004-04-06 00:15:24 PST post in thread "Re: The AT auction" can be seen at

well said, Duane!

- iz

The individual questions and even concerns of potential members is one thing, but you and your exponded disdain for TRA in paticular, is the real issue. You apparently have no clue how or desire to use the system to promote change from within.

In my previous life, I spent several years as a AF First Sergeant and Senior Enlisted Advisor. In that capacity, I remember folks of two different perswasions: Those who continuiously bitched about what was wrong, and that is about all they ever did. There were also those who surffaced problems and volenteeered their time and services on advisory councels and adhock commities, finding solutions, and helping to improve not only there own lot but that of their fellow airman. Most of the latter individuals understood when to step forward and when a step backwards was prudent, in order to preserve and accomplish the intended end result. You seem to lack the latter quality and as a result, you piss a lot of people off; in some cases, folks who understand the core of your concerns and the need to address and fix the problems.-- Folks who would otherwise become involved in your efforts,will not support or become involved with you if they feel, or believe; the in your face, constant eat them alive threats, and your agressivenessness, might result in throwing the baby out with the bath water. Additionally, those same folks may well fight you every step of the way. I believe, you are seeing a considerable amount of that backlash, expressed here on RMR. Take a break and think about it.

Fred

Iz,