WOW! I *NEVER* thought that would happen. I guess I'll see what else shakes
out. There may yet be a light at the end of the tunnel!
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
This is a country which stands tallest in troubled times, a country
that clings to fundamental principles, cherishes its constitutional
heritage, and rejects simple solutions that compromise the values
that lie at the roots of our democratic system. -- Supreme Court
Justice Thurgood Marshall, 1972
I told you things were improving. I really think we have a good bunch
of people that are interested in doing the right thing.
I don't know of anything else quite as eath shattering that happened
there.
Still no action on what to do about Iz. I thought they should get him
a hunk but they said if they got one for Iz, they'd have to get Jerry
one too. ;-)
Kaplow, are you really admitting that things may have changed? Isn't that
step one in the 12 step process? You CAN break this obsession with TRA!
There are other things that have happened over the last few years or will
happen, but aren't posted on RMR, because, to be honest, in case you've not
noticed, some (non members) will rarely, if ever, acknowledge it as a good
change, without labeling it something for the "transparent mosaic, labled as
model airplane parts", with an undocumented delay"
Grasshopper... Sit back and listen, and don't be so ready to hop...There's
much that has changed since you were with TRA...
writes:
You and I have a different take on this. The CONSIDERATION of your
expulsion is a duty of the board, if there were reports/complaints from
members that you were causing harm to the organization... but...
To the credit of the entire board (not just one BoD member) it was put
down. What do I mean by that (especially since I wasn't there)?
Although your inference is that one BoD member would not countenance
your expulsion, one member by themselves could not have prevented it --
erego, I must give credit to a majority (in some sense) of the board for
not allowing it (though, again, it may have been DRIVEN by one member).
And please don't take this the wrong way -- I don't believe you should
have been expelled, but I believe it entirely proper that the
consideration should have taken place.
In essence, it actually affirms my belief that the BoD has improved,
because a) they responded to a perceived problem, and b) upon further
analysis, took what I believe to be the appropriate action (in other
words, no action). Going by past history, one of those two probably
wouldn't have taken place -- either they would have ignored a possible
problem and kept going, or they would have expelled a member without
taking careful consideration of both the need for the expulsion, and its
consequences. I don't see how that can be viewed as anything other than
'better' than the past...
David Erbas-White
I agree, the BoD can be thought "better" than in the past for a number
reasons, foremost of which is constitution
but has a long way to go, as the wrongful, self-serving or arbitrary
actions of the past remain standing to the present without challenge
transparency is still a long way off
- iz
Wait a minute here... I thought it was s'posed to be a mosaic not
transparency?
Crap, now I'll have to rename my L2 bird....
Ted Novak
TRA#5512
IEAS#75
Mmmmm... Iz?
What makes you think it will ever be, or should be, transparent? What
in law would make it so?
I hate to tell you this, but having been involved in several 501(c)3
corporations myself, the actual operations don't necessarily have to be
'fully' transparent, nor do they have to be voted on by the members,
etc. Certain aspects of the operation must be, but others don't. I sat
through the formation of one corporation where the folks creating it
specifically went out of their way to ensure that things WEREN'T
transparent, and it was all done legally (and for good reasons, though I
was NOT one of those in favor of doing it that way).
Again, I believe the board is 'better than before'. I also don't
believe that they have any interest in conforming to what any one (or
even several) members may want. They MAY not have any interest (not
that I believe this, this is a hypothetical) even if ALL members wanted
that -- but then, the members would vote with their wallets and feet.
I come back to the point that as long as I believe the organization is
making overall positive progress, it should be supported.
David Erbas-White
"Transparency" is a rallying cry often used by malcontents who have
nothing else of substance to support their position. So instead they
attack the way the decision was made. We've been seeing this in local
politics a lot lately, with one politician campaigning almost entirely
on making the process "transparent" while offering no real solutions of
her own. The way I see it, the only thing that matters is the result.
As long as reasonable solutions and choices are made, how those
decisions were arrived at is irrelevant.
TRA is a non-profit corporation under Alaskan statute, and is a 501c3
tax-exempt organization under IRS regulation
it is supported by member funds
it should conduct it's financial affairs in an honest and upright
fashion, have its books audited by a Certified Public Accounting firm to
validate that their financial reporting is performed consistent with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles [GAAP], and the so validated
reports should be made accessible for member review without obstruction
for starters
for example ...
http://www.arrl.org/announce/annualreport /
http://www.arrl.org/announce/annualreport/2004/2004-Annual-Report.pdf
http://www.arrl.org/announce/annualreport/2004/final%20fs%20123104.pdf
these in fact are available regardless of membership, on the Internet.
No request, formal or otherwise, required
- iz
None of this has anything to do with regulation of rocketry, motor
certs, etc. It's just another excuse to bash TRA.
That's their choice. If you prefer the way their org is run, feel free
to join them and leave the rocketry orgs to the people who actually do
rocketry.
p
Are you actually INCAPABLE of staying on topic?
I thought so.
Jerry
"TRA has "crippled" rocketry for decades, by failing to be honest in its
operations, fair in its treatment of its constituency, and effective in
its role as an advocacy."
- Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed
"I was feeling badly that I was just
wassting my time responding to Ray."
- Alan Jones
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
At least we know for certain that is not the case WRT Tripoli. After
all, there are several valid complaints:
HPR magazine endorsed by TRA for 1.5 decades all the time it was a "late
or never" proposition, absorbing member money year after year.
A variety of certification foibles. Certifying motors that were never
tested, certifying delays that were never tested, decertifying motors
with no rule allowing it, endorsing field modifications of known
defective motors (decertification required under the rules) with no
recertification as required, demanding permits even the law does not
require, etc.
And then we have the whole regulation writing via NFPA where the "sport
rocket caucus" itself authored and adopted the very regs that killed the
membership roles. Sounds more self-destructive than self-regulation to
me.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
The HPR crap is fixed did you miss that?
Your certification crap is nothing more than allegations.
You don't like NFPA so you thought shipping rocket motors are model
aircraft parts would fix it? DOT sure got a laugh out of that. Did
you pay that fine yet?
At the meeting Saturday, it was announced that TRA has exercised their
option to give HPR 90 days notice that HPR is no longer the official
magazine and there will no longer be any relationship between HPR and
TRA.
I assume Kevin will be removing all links to and mention of HPR from
the TRA web site soon.
Jerry - It's time for you to start publishing your magazine.
wrote:
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.