Not from where I sit, he doesn't.
Gee, that's funny Fred... what exactly is NAR and TRA in court for? "US" lookin' a bit larger now...
It is just that NAR and TRA are still two-faced and biased about it.
~ Duane Phillips.
Should we make a list of stated supporters and stated non-supporters so TRA knows who to target?
And Kurt, what WOULD I have to do to earn your respect and credibility? Get TRA certifications?
A private club is free to reject anyone as long as it isn't for reasons of race, religion, etc.
Ok, it's sent.
they have a demostrated policy of expelling members who dissent and they are 1 of 2 AHJ's that completely dominate the hobby!
Jerry Irv> In article ,
involves being witness to a crime or tort the result of which is you are discredited with a monologue in the propoganda rag of TRA and removed so you are allowed to be removed from meetings where you might be so bold as to testify to your witness accounts of the crimes or torts.
doing (TRA justice I presume). And he was also the prime "prosecutor" on the tribunal to review my reinstatement request 10 years later after my 3 year removal had long since ended. He of course declined it. Conflicts of interest are a GOAL of TRA.
force attention on the problem. As we now all know no amount of attention brought on problems at TRA results in either addressing them or of course solving them.
in NFPA-1127, etc. (kiss of death).
(kiss of death).
the laws and rules they were breaking with cites and evidence (kiss of death).
alleged crimes and torts first hand (kiss of death).
removal) He probably has been reinstated
God help us, Ray!
RayDunak> Bob K. wrote:
ah, this was meant to be posted, I must have clicked "send to individual" instead of "send to newsgroup". My point was that rule by a simply majority allows for compromise or destruction of basic principals. That is why the U.S. is a republic with a constitution.
your position appeared to be that if TRA members joined NAR for the purpose of influencing NAR policy, that was legitimate. My position is that an organizational charter and mission should not be so vulnerable to the efforts of an energetic lobby.
original email (post) follows
====================================================================== let America go to hell in a handbasket, as long as the majority votes in favor of it, or fails to vote against it? We are barely 200 years old, and you are ready to see the Great American Experiment devolve at the whim of a democratic lobby?
God help us with such patriots as these!
- iz ======================================================================
The problem is, your basis for claiming corruption is simply that the BOD, with the support of the majority of the membership, do not run the organization the way you think they should. You didn't start this anti-TRA campaign until Wickman got his knickers in a twist 'cause TRA wouldn't kowtow to him. If TRA had crowned John Wickman King of Deregulation, you would not now be whining about "corruption".
Jerry wrote (about DOT):
Ok, so you're say>
Oh, but it's so much easier to blame TRA/NAR than to actually do anything about meeting (or changing) the DOT's current requirements.
And there's a big difference between being invited to leave, and being told to leave.
they invent policies to suit their agenda, without the memberships knowledge or consent (e.g.; moving from a member governed to board governed organization)
they do not apply their own capricious policies consistently (e.g.; tolerance of serious AT irregularities including certification of RMS as just demonstrated)
they do not fulfill their fiduciary duties to their members (e.g.; motor certification fraud resulting in voided insurance)
they do not represent the interests of either rocketry or the membership on the NFPA (or in Congress, for that matter)
and they expell or censure those who call them to account for their actions
that is corruption
none of these FACTS have anything to do with ARSA or JW
RayDunak> Iz wrote:
how did an altered ACS DoT document, originating from a AeroTech fax machine, find its way into the approval process, Ray?
RayDunak> Jerry wrote (about DOT):
are you not listening Ray? My membership renewal would have been rejected if not for someones intercession on my behalf.
have you not seen Bob Kaplow's story, just posted? And those of mnay other exiles?
how can your perceptions be so filtered Ray?
RayDunak> Iz wrote:
And an even bigger difference in leaving when asked and being removed in abstentia anyway.
Or being removed and told come back in 3 years and 3 years later you are rejected, 6, rejected, 9 rejected, ad nauseaum.
He doesn'tcare. He doesn't believe you. He trusts TRA leadership implicitly. He probably feels they probably had a reason so were justified. Screw the rules and any form of due process.
Because they actively ignore a valid government issued DOT piece of paper placed in front of their face, and also take one they got issued from Aerotech regarding ACS (a competitor) and use it as the one and only document they recognize, except it is obvious to the casual observer it has no merit whatsoever.
Did you know Sue McMurray told a couple of prospective motor vendors they had to get Aerotech's permission to sell reloadable motors? Yep. She sure did. And refused to talk to them further till they had it in writing!
Every time I post a new detail it just gets better and better,eh?
I've got a bunch of 'em.
I met them all along. And you?
You entirely missing the point in no way changes the facts or the next series of events. You are a dumbfounded spectator in this madness, with a touch of verbal diarrehia with no brain-mouth connection.
Very, very well said. I hurt for LOL on your dead horse analogy~!
I think it also acquiesces to some of the good that former leaders have accomplished. And it also addresses the mis-steps (appeasement) of the past, that have come home to roost, and tricked many a member out of standing up for their freedoms. I think ignorance caused that one. People don't come into the hobby to hear about laws and restrictions. They come to fly rockets.
More action for correction needs to follow. In a world where there was only NAR, it was only NAR that was interested in certifications. Now that world has changed.
Like Zooty stated in another post, I also feel that we need to pull together. But unlike Zooty, I do not believe it can be by silencing the issues, which have already been kept back too long. We got to clean up the trash, which is hard when so many would rather pull to protect the image of the past. Nobody's perfect.
I don't want to critic the past except to show where it could be better, not to harm the individuals in place, but to correct the direction that still is hurting. Denial of wrong in the past doesn't help.
Some people actually *want* this type and level of regulation. It is those people I cannot understand to any degree. Regulation only restricts the innocent. The willful bad will be bad anyhow anyway anywhere they can design to and pull it off. Laws and rules have no effect on those people.
To me, a sign of moving position to accomodate Jerry, is a HUGE step in the right direction for the hobby as a whole. All the sudden, it would be cheaper to enjoy the hobby. I would be able to go to my local hobby store and see something more than Estes and AeroTech... nix that... they haven't had AeroTech in stock *still* ever since the fire. This is what got me noticing Jerry, and his reasoning behind *his* fire and brimstone. It is also why even though ARSA may not have structure (which I do see as a problem), I started looking at them really hard. They believe in a more open market, something that I believe in.
The tighter the restrictions are, the more people start squeezing out in various directions. Having guidelines that act as boundaries, that are honored by the entire group is a much better framework, especially in a hobby with such a proven safety record, like no other.
"Become the change you want to see" Ghandi (IIRC)
This is where NAR and TRA can grow. This is also why no amount of reasoning the current TRA/NAR restrictions on the hobby makes much sense to me. I refuse to be required to do legal things that legally I am not required to do. The NAR and TRA should act _now_ and not after the court ruling. Both should be bastions that stand for protection of the the freedoms of those in the hobby, not as an agent of control. The orgs are here to support the needs of the rocketeers, not the other way around.
The PAD exemption is black and white, right now. A consumer rocket *is* a propellant actuated device. This is stuff we already currently have in the law, and as such, eliminates 99% of the undue process many force upon themselves. The propellant used *is not* explosive. The hobby *is* safe. If a manufacturer can get his stuff labelled as not applicable under explosive laws, then why require the stuff to be regulated as an explosive. It doesn't matter what other manufacturers have done. "That's the way it has always been done" better be backed by cause and reason, not appeasement and supposition. For all of these reasons, we all need to take a larger and more firm stand on this. All those who are "waivering" or "not sure" should review the alternatives. To not take this stance is to see, by and large, the death of LMR. You all saw what happened to the Hatch-Kohl version of the bill? It is difficult indeed to build a decent LMR when restricted to cardboard and paper... (no all-thread... no metal reload casings... no recovery U-bolts... etc.). Non-metallic non-composite would mean exactly that. We are about to regress back to the early days of NAR.
Too much of what JI has said in the past is coming true. Whether right or wrong on his personal affairs, he happens to be the focal point of one end of the spectrum. He is not even against certifications, just against their current form. I agree with that wholeheartedly. But the other end of the spectrum is continuing to go farther away... it is time they return back apiece.
Additionally, some would say, "Keep quite! The new rocketeers might be frightened!" To them I say, "Let's not rest on our larels." If this "DSC" job is the only push we are making to publicize the hobby, then we don't have much hope anyhow. We need a whole lot more than 80K. Why not start planning and implementing yet another showing, more magazine ads, and other types of outlets? And better yet, start accumulating ways to "spread the word" within our own communities, and involve more people in it. Get more vendors involved. Make a bigger deal about launches, especially the major regional and national launches. But do not hold off doing the right thing about change, just because of a momentary (and passing) spike in sales and public notice.
~ Duane Phillips.
problem with TRA, I make sure
even if they don't post
No, as I understood him, he is referring to handling one document at a time. No longer to be refused "en masse". IIRC, the EX number first.
~ Duane Phillips.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.