USR Motors on ROL

I'm glad you both see the humor in it (:-)

Fred

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed wrote:

Comply with the TMT guidelines. It's been said many times right here.

My understanding of the requirements where USR is lacking is having a LEMP & DOT numbers.

I'm just pass>RayDunak>>

Phil Stein

He has posted the "ownership" stuff before. Was there something he should have done such that the paperwork was 'associated with him?

I'm inclined to say 'here here'. I don't agree that one cannot have motors made in Mexico (by a little kid living in a van,... down by the river), imported, tested at the 'labler' and then certified. However, that's how they see it. I see no reason why I couldn't go to the fire marshal or UL and say "these motors comply with 1127 and I'm testing baches to comply with

Joel. phx

The biggest "requirement" seems, in practice, to be "Jerry Irvine is not be involved"...

Look, Ray, I didn't start out with some kind of a "poor Jerry" bias, but some things just didn't seem to fit any other explanation than that "they changed the rules" _already_, as if to specifically exclude him. (I can't sum up my conclusions any more concisely than that.)

Which means that the question of whether Jerry is able or willing to "meet the requirements" can not be discussed, in any meaningful way, without including the question of whether those "requirements" are what they should be.

-dave w

It's irrelevant to whether Jerry is being currently excluded. The requirements are what they are, others have met them and so can he.

However, I wonder if you'd really be any happier if they ever did come out and say, "Yes, we don't want anything to do with Jerry or any business associated with him, and we never will." I'm getting to the point where I wish they would do that, just so everyone could finally shut up about it and move on.

Barred question at TRA.

Jerry

Requiring LEMP is literally illegal.

BTW having it to offer before did NOT help with either TRA or NAR and they were NOT disputing the EX numbers at that time. They even had all the items on the list and more.

Assuming you are any authority on EX numbers (which you are not), how can you claim to reject DOT papers which are dated valid?

I am just posting a reply as I would if I were in the TRA list till my membership fee is refunded as agreed in 3-92.

Jerry

1. I am asking YOU to cite the RENEWAL cert requirements to me (with a literal reading) as a " common man" TRA member.
2. I have attempted the process in full as described in a post in an adjacent thread tonight with the reference to my LEMP.

Jerry

It just smaks of Calvinball to me. A Tripoli-esque term if you ask me.

Jerry

There's the rub. I COULD if I knew it!

Jerry

other vendors passed our "Jerry filter! Why can't Jerry?"

Ray, you are dense

dense, adj.

1. Slow to apprehend; thickheaded.

ok, make that "very dense"

- iz

That pretty much sums up Ray's argument, doesn't it!

-dave w

If requiring a LEMP is illegal, why don't you get one & then have TRA prosecuted?

Phil

Phil Stein

Illegal yes. Criminal, unclear or maybe not at all.

I did.

So if you have a LEMP, woudn't that mean that YOU are a manufacturer?

You had TRA prosecuted?

So show me specifically which rule Jerry cannot comply with if he wanted to?

to "not be Jerry Irvine"

- iz

I said, "show me the rule". That is NOT a TMT motor cert rule.