another PAMPA election coming up

I received a letter in the mail from Dale Barry who is running for the office of PAMPA Vice President. I sent him an e-mail asking him what his position on the BOM rule is. I have included the entire text of his response to me. I think it is important for all the people who are running for office in our organization make public their position on contraversial topics like the BOM rule. Otherwise it will be just a popularity contest. I won't start another war by posting my own opinions. Like everybody else I get one vote and I'll base that vote on the responses I get from all the candidates.

Text follows:

Ron,
Ahh,the infamous builder of the model rule! I personnally think it's a
waste of time to have a rule that can't be inforced, and while I adhere to
the BOM myself,it wouldn't hurt my feelings if the US joined the rest of the
world and flew FAI.I think,and this is just my opinion,that the people who
protest the loudest about keeping it are the same ones who get top
appearance points(with two or three exceptions) and don't want to give up
any advantage over better flyers who just don't finish their models as
well.The arguement that no BOM would mean everyone would be flying ugly
airplanes just doesn't hold water as far as I'm concerned.I can't think of
any negatives associated with no BOM.Thanks for reading my letter and feel
free to ask me anything you like.
Dale

So tell us what his letter said.

The BOM rule is the LAST thing that I would consider when electing someone to office.

Bigs

" What constitutes the dignity of a craft is that it creates a fellowship, that it binds men together and fashions for them a common language. For there is but one problem - the problem of human relations."

Bigs,

If you're a PAMPA member, you'll probably get one. It basically just states his qualifications and his reasons for running. Very appropriate for a candidate. No mud slinging or anything. Just the straight deal.

Is this your way to ignore Len's rule about no BOM discussion until the next AMA Rule's cycle? Why do you want to antagonize Len? Not good.

LAST EDITED ON Aug-27-04 AT 07:04 AM (CDT)
 
If elections are to be something other than popularity contests the candidates need to make their positions known on the issues. Biographical history is good but it doesn't tell me how I'll be represented. If a candidate's position on an issue doesn't matter to you. Fine. But you can't make an informed choice without information. Assuming that you want to make an informed choice.

Edit: this is not about BOM but about getting useful information to the voting members. I had no intention of antagonizing Len. I hope he doesn't take it that way. This forum is an active communication (communication being an exchange of information) vehicle for active CLPA flyers and PAMPA members. It is a good place (the very best single place) to exchange information relevant to PA. A candidate's position on issues should be of great interest to PA flyers.

Is the letter you show here a verbatim cut and paste or did you paraphrase or type it in?

It is a cut and paste.

>I received a letter in the mail from Dale Barry who is
>running for the office of PAMPA Vice President. I sent him
>an e-mail asking him what his position on the BOM rule is.

Posting private e-mails on a forum is a no-no, I think. Unless, of course you got Dale's permission. Having private thoughts broadcast can lead to some bad things...

Of course, knowing Dale, in this case I do not think he would say any different if asked publically.

Dale is a great guy and has a very level head. He gets my vote.

'Zilla,

I got the letter too. It was not an e-mail, but a letter "To all PAMPA members;". I received it a few days ago, and assumed that everyone else did too. Nicely printed in blue ink with a very attractive letterhead style. I would scan and post it, but I think if Dale wants that, he can do it (I guess with Len's permission?).

>'Zilla,
>
>I got the letter too. It was not an e-mail, but a letter
>"To all PAMPA members;". I received it a few days ago, and
>assumed that everyone else did too. Nicely printed in blue
>ink with a very attractive letterhead style. I would scan
>and post it, but I think if Dale wants that, he can do it (I
>guess with Len's permission?).

I think Godzilla is right on this, and you are confusing a campaign statement letter Dale has mailed out with posted response to a specific question.

I would not expect any sort of private correspondence ought be posted on any site. If I thought otherwise I would have long ago posted a particulary silly e-mail from Peabody, one which wrongfully accused me--and a couple friends--of the most outrageous conduct during recent campaign for PAMPA president.

Then again, if such is allowed, y'all let me know a.s.a.p. I've still got a copy of Peabody's delightfully well thought out missive, would **love** to share it--and the unvarnished truth of the situation--with all of you...

Yeah, I re-read later, and just haven't had time to correct my response. Sorry.

Dale (dad to me) sent a letter to all PAMPA members. It is hard to get that many out on the same day. If you are a PAMPA member I am sure that you will get one soon.

Thank You

Are there others running for the office? Just curious. That wouldn't be how we typically do it in our club, or any other club I've ever been in. "You, there. You'll do. Anybody opposed? You're elected." Then later: "Let's increase the term of office to 2 years. Anybody opposed? Three votes opposed, way more votes in favor. Done." My two year sentance is about up, thankfully. Steve

>Are there others running for the office? Just curious.>
snip
If I remember right from the PAMPA meeting at the NATS, Ted Fancher threw his hat in the ring for VP.

To clear up any possible confusion,the letter wasn't sent to all Pampa members.While that actually would have been easier,I went through the Pampa directory and attempted to send it to members that I had never met.Since the letter was a introduction/campaign statement I didn't see a reason to send it to people I've known for years,if that was a bad plan,sorry.
If I missed someone that should have gotten one,it wasn't intentional and I'll be glad to send you one out,or if someone who did receive one wants to post it here,feel free(with Len's permission,of course),just be sure to post it in it's entirety.
When Stunts News comes out,there will also be a shorter campaign statement in it.Thank you.

LAST EDITED ON Aug-29-04 AT 12:49 PM (CDT)
 
Well, I guess it is appropriate for the other candidate for PAMPA Veep to weigh in on this issue.

While I like Dale a lot and think he'd be a fine vice President if the membership prefers, we do have clear and distinct differences on the issues of the BOM and Appearance Points.

Here's my point of view.

If flying the tricks is the heart of stunt, I feel the that the BOM and Appearance Points are its Soul. The attraction that makes it so special that people literally do it actively and with great joy for a lifetime -- *without ever "winning" anything*. The thing those who oppose retaining these aspects of the event are missing is the fact that stunt attracts wonderful people for whom the "prize" isn't in plaques but in the doing of thing. Winning isn't everything in stunt and, because of that, we have a wealth of wonderful people who actively participate and don't particularly care if Paul wins another Walker Cup or if 'zilla wins his first.

That is unique and worth retaining at almost any cost.

The airplanes and the artistry that produce them make stunt different and--dare I say it--better than those events that have categorically dismissed the entire aspect of "modeling" from their competitive environment. Stunt is unique in its ability to retain and even attract significant numbers of adherents in the shrinking world of Control Line activity. It isn't the Walker Cup or the tricks we do that make them a welcome and respected part of the community, it's the fact that those in our fraternity are skilled artisans who build wonderful airplanes and appreciate the same skills in others.

If anyone would like to see the proof of that pudding, go to Tucson next March for VSC XVI and see the numbers of beautiful airplanes, the phalanx of cameras one must run to get to the circles, the joy and comradery amongst the entrants and spectators; and then count the percentage of participants who have even a remote chance of beating Billy! It'll be immediately obvious it wasn't the "hardware" that brought them to the middle of the desert; but, something did. That something is our soul.

For those of you for whom a candidate's position on this issue resonates, you have a clear choice. Dale and I will have to agree to disagree on this one.

Like Dale, I'll have a campaign statement in the next issue of Stunt News regarding other issues I feel are very important, primarily maintaining the organization's bylaw mandated emphasis on Control Line Precision Aerobatics, the event.

Thanks for listening and please take the time to vote (and, oh yeah, be sure to sign up for next year while you're at it)

LAST EDITED ON Aug-29-04 AT 08:12 PM (CDT)
 
Hi Ted,
It was great to see and talk with you at the WC. I am so sorry that the SE is no more. Like I told you there, it was the best looking plane I had seen of yours in quite a while! (just IMHO)

As to you and Dale disagreeing, I don't think y'all are as far apart on the "unmentionable rule" as it appears.

It comes down to something I have said for over 8 years: The " " rule is not enforceable as it is presently written. That's what Dale said in his email that was copied here....

I hope you see this, but, alas, we cannot discuss the " " rule per Leonard's request.

Good Luck! I think either of you will be excellent for the job.
(of course Dale IS one of our Southern boys! hahhahaha)

Bill <><

OK, you brought this up. I am going to speak to the "issue" and then I am going to shut this down. I don't mind providing a platform for both candidates to speak their position, but I resent the use of the forum to try to push the killing of the builder of the model rule in a thinly veiled fashion. And, that is my opinion, is the reason this was brought up in the first place.

For one thing, I do not support "one issue politics". I am against abortion. But I am not going to support a candidate simply because he is against abortion. I will look at how he will represent his country (in this case PAMPA) and how well he will be able to perform the duties of the office to which he was elected. Abortion is just one of many issues. So is this builder of the model rule. Let us please stick to the real issues and not go after this as "that is our candidate because..."

But since the comment has been made, let me answer it. It was stated that "the people who protest the loudest about keeping it are the same ones who get top appearance points (with two or three exceptions) and don't want to give up any advantage over better flyers who just don't finish their models as well."

If the above is true, then it must be equally true that the people who cry the loudest about wanting to kill the builder of the model rule are the ones who do not get top appearance points and who feel they are at a disadvantage and cannot win against those who finish their models better.

(Has no one ever noticed that no one who has ever won the Nats did so with a plane sitting in the front row on appearance point day?)

And yet that above premise is not true. Last year when the vote was put to the competitors at the Nats to give them the opportunity to suspend the rules just this one time, the mail in vote from all of the competitors at the Nats went in favor of keeping it. It was again put to the competitors at the pilot's meeting a year ago and it again went in favor of keeping it. Majority is supposed to rule, is it not? A rule proposal was made to change the rule in thye rule book, and it again lost.

I thus have no sympathy for the minority who wish to drop the rule. I have no compassion to further discuss it on this forum. End of discussion.

I repeat, if you wish to talk real issues--the issues that involve PAMPA--if you want to talk about who will serve the membership of PAMPA better in carrying out the purposes of PAMPA including its charter, then fine. If you simply want to talk builder of the model rule, no go.