USR vs Aerotech

Here is my SS K-Rock kicking on a 6grain pro54 K660 at three oaks.

He was defeated, kicked in the teeth and flogged by Artie Schwarnzenegger

Umm, Iz? I'm not sure if you're being serious.

If you are, please note that 'Dave Grayvis' is the name of our just-unseated Governor (Gray Davis), spelled sideways. Then you can use that as a determination if this is a real name or an anonymous troll...

David Erbas-White

That countersuit, do you know if it's the same one in which I was called as a witness by Jerry?

who cares? we have bigger fish to fry

I'll repeat:

- iz

David

I'm guessing TIC by Iz :-)

Troll? For a troll, it seems to be hitting close to the bridge.

Joel. phx

Everything written by him may be true. But that's just the trouble, it's all been worded vaguely, without specific cites, and with some claims that border on the ludicrous. At least in (much) of Jerry's case, he is in fact providing (some) cites. Jerry may be leaving some things out (apparently is), but "Dave Grayvis" is leaving even MORE out.

And, again, what bothers me is NOT that Jerry is not certified, it's the shenanigans that APPEAR to have taken place in order to make that come to pass. At a different level I'm also concerned that the national organizations are not doing as much as they could/should be doing to make the field more open to vendors/manufacturers.

David Erbas-White

I'm begining to see a twisted mess as a whole, instead of an inconsistancy here and one there.

Hey, put it out there. It appears that clubs put in place some rules to protect the membership from the manufacturers, not just bad motors. What I don't understand is how this 'fellowship' crossed into the evil "non-high power" club {in the days of ol}.

So a couple of new manufacturers being certified (under the current process) and a lawsuit to beat down a arrant government agency aren't actions to open the field to more manufacturers?

Joel. phx

Great. Then you will have no objection to sending me your address for proper reply. Fred of Rogers.

That's a fact.

Have you noticed the parties in the suit have put it behind them, but non-parties are STILL fixated on it 10 years after it was concluded and almost 15 years after it started?

I have.

Jerry

Joel Corwith wrote:

The items that have been raised by "Dave Grayvis" leave me with more questions than answers, I'm afraid. But I do agree that it reveals more of the 'twisted mess', as you put it, it's just that there are still so many shadows...

I'm not sure I follow your last statement, but I'm tired and I'm sure it will come to me upon reflection (but feel free to expand ).

But I'm not really happy that the clubs have put in place some rules to 'protect' the membership from the manufacturers. Just as I'm not happy with mandatory helmet and seat belt laws (and their ilk), and the mania against second-hand smoke that means that you can't smoke in a bar anywhere in Kalifornia (I'm a non-smoker, BTW), I don't want the clubs deciding who can and cannot manufacture motors. And let's be frank and stop pussyfooting around--the way the system is set up, not being able to obtain NAR or TRA certification DOES prevent a manufacturer from successfully making motors. That wouldn't be the case if NAR/TRA were not the 'AHJ' in regards to certification, but they are. Being that, though, they should be doing the absolute minimum required to certify a motor, and NOT ONE IOTA MORE! If the true benefit is to be towards the membership, then do the minimum for legal motor certification, and then do something like the Auto Club does with hotels, and rate the vendors or manufacturers (i.e., one-to-four stars based on having met certain criteria). This would serve the dual purpose of expanding the hobby to more outlets, while providing the purported 'benefit' of 'protecting' the membership, while those who would rather make their own decisions can do so (but still within the bounds of legality and reasonable safety).

I agree that both of the above are positive signs, and most of what I've seen as 'problematic' are issues arising with TRA. But I have to admit, I've seen a few items (not many, but they do exist) that NAR has been involved with that I find troubling. However, with NAR, I've found the BOT to be responsive, and I commend Bunny (and others) for their positive approachs and dedication to the hobby. One of the things I find highly offensive about Jerry, and one reason I take things that he says about folks with a grain of salt (or a pillar ) are his incessant attacks on Mark Bundick. That's not to say that I find everything NAR does to be in agreement with my beliefs, or that I believe that they haven't played 'fast-and-loose' in a couple of instances, but OVERALL I believe the NAR signal-to-noise ratio to be what I would expect in any non-profit organization with integrity. I cannot say the same about what I have seen about TRA, in particular about 3 items: 1) historically how HPR magazine has been/is being handled, 2) the issues with TMT certifications (and in particular the apparent problems pointed out by John Cato), and 3) that there appears to very much be an 'old boys' network that is being worked to include some and exclude others. There are other issues, as well, but they are minor in comparison, and people of good faith can agree to disagree on them, and/or work to make things better. But I honestly DON'T see that the above 3 items have been addressed fully/properly, and in some cases not at all. I do commend TRA for at least attempting to distance themselves from the problems with HPR, but it appears to be too little, too late in many regards.

David Erbas-White

Was it Ventura Co.?

Good guess!

But still wrong.

Try again.

By the way, My email add. is valid.

Am I a non_party? how do you know?

Dave Grayvis appears nowhere in any lawsuit papes I have ever seen on any case.

Neither has Chuck Roger's.

I wrote: "That countersuit, do you know if it's the same one in which I was called as a witness by Jerry?"

Dave Grayvis replied:

I think so, yes.