OK, let's cool it, guys!

I didn't get my copy of the Stunt News until yesterday and let some of this go on not knowing the background and also trying, myself, to see what the problem was. Having now read the current issue of Stunt News I do see and understand where some of the current controversy came from. However, it is not a "crisis" as some of you have made it out to be (The executive council, trustees, or whatever we care to call it will take care of it.)

I was at the worlds and at the Nats this year and overheard a couple of the conversations, although I did not take part in them. I understand more than some of you who are simply reading this of some of the perceived problems. And, yes, the concerns are real. But I also did not make it an issue or bring it up.

And I must confess that I was also not at the PAMPA meeting on Wednesday night at the Nats and did not know about the deserved honor being given to Warren. (Interestingly, although I am a member of PAMPA and was around the site all week, I never saw a post or heard any announcement saying when the meeting was to be held or that the site had been changed. I only received information about its time and location by word of mouth. And I had to ask. Maybe I missed the post.)

I will make but one comment here, and that is that all of what has been aired here on the forum in the last few days wuld probably not have surfaced here had it not been for one unfortunate statement by John, himself, in the Stunt News suggesting that such an award should not be given--to anybody. But let's cool it. I am sure it will take care of itself, and Warren will be given the (in my opinion deserved) award. So, let's cool it.

Now, as to the rest of it. John, as an elected official, is in the public eye. He deserves my and your support. He will, however, be subject to criticism for anything he does as well as to be applauded by those who support his actions. He would be well served, however, to make as few changes as necessary and to include others in the decision making process. When he includes others, he not only receives the benefit of their input, but he also knows that he has or does not have their support. And if the trustees are the ones making the decision, even if he is the one suggesting it, he is totally off the hook for those who would wish to place the blame.

I understand this process in working with the church. If you have a church council, you use the council to bring motions to the floor before going to the voters, or secure their input before making executive decisions on your own. And if the council turns you down or suggests otherwise, it is probably best not to go forward anway. Perhaps John, as owner of various businesses and thus the chief decision maker, hasn't yet learned that process. He will, I am sure, and that will be the advice that I give him.

On the reaction of others, I have seen a total reaction of "us" verses "them" from some. This is totally inappropriate. I have long known that probably 90% of those who dabble in control line flying do not attend contests. Some aspire to learn, however, and for them PAMPA is a great resource. PAMPA is founded as a SIG to oversee certain aspects of competition (precision aerobatics) under the AMA. (I hope I got the gist of the wording right and we don't argue semantics here.)

At the same time, it reaches out to new people to bring them into the hobby and competition aspect without placing any pressure on anyone to do so. If you wish to remain a sport flyer and pay your dues so you can get your magazine, you are welcome. I did that myself, many years ago, when I was unable to attend contests of any kind (because I "worked" on week-ends). Just be aware that you are paying for a magazine and that virtually everything that is done through PAMPA is done on a volunteer basis. Even the production of the magazine, itself. Your dues are not "supporting PAMPA". They are buying the magazine. (And if you don't believe it, check on the cost of advertising in Stunt News and then try to place the same ad in Flying Models or Model Aviation. Guess where the major revinue for these magazines is coming from.)

OK, having said that, no one is trying to kick the sport flyer out, and no one is proposing a split from PAMPA. People may have said things. But it is not happening. And it is not the "elite" verses..., or the "majority" verses the "minority". PAMPA is constituted for a purpose and it is the concern of those who founded it, and who serve it for this reason, that it remain true to its goals. It is not a sports flyer organization, nor should it ever be one. It is an orgainization of those interested in control line stunt...only. You can have other interests and you can join other organizations that support those interests. But those are not and should not be the interests of PAMPA. When Nats coverage is given in Stunt News, it should be coverage of the PA events only. No combat, no carrier, no speed. They have their own SIGS. They give their own coverage. And the same should be said of any other contest. PAMPA is the "Precision Aerobatics Model Pilots Association"

That is what PAMPA is all about. And it is that concern that certain people have in that we maintain our focus and pursue our proper goals. Yes, John is a friend of those in the control line hobby. He has done a lot for the hobby. I applaud his efforts there. I support his efforts there.

He is also now the president of PAMPA. This is not just control line, however. It is controline precision aerobatics. And, to be more precise, it has a focus on competition precison aerobatics. In his role he needs to focus on that. If he does so, he can become a great president. We need to support him in that role, and we need to help him do that.

Do we all need reminders once in a while? Yes. But let's do that in a proper way. And for now, let's cool it!

Like it! SOOOOO can we talk about BOM!!!!!....LOL

Thanks for what you do here it's first class....

Scott(SPORT FLYER/FUN FLYER/and sometimes compete)Riese

Lets cool it? Generally pretty good advice. Normally I choose to conduct myself in that manner. I waited for three days to post my response to the now locked messages. I actually considered what I had to say before running off at the mouth like some. Somehow I don't think a well thought out response should be denied. But there I go thinking again. I notice my message to you in brought out several "suck up" responses from some of the usual me tooers in your procedure message, responding of course to a message of mine, which they know nothing about, and probably never will. I thought I've made it pretty plain in the past that I appreciate this board, derive a great deal of pleasure from using it and I don't plan on abusing my use of the board. I hope that I don't leave the impression with others that there is any rancorous disagreement now or has there ever been between us. You never impressed me as the sort who needed a constant course of people sucking up to you and I still don't. In the remote chance that I'm wrong, this is about as close as I can come.

Thanks Len,
I had stopped myself a few times when trying to reply on several post on these subjects. However it is just as I thought, most of the talk was taken out of context scuttle butt. I hate to sound like Andy Rooney but Do you ever notice how conversations are taken out of context and then someone puts their on spin on it.

I did however reply to one failed post from this morning and even if it was deleted, she was still purdy!

By the way the FP35 I purchased from you is a Horse. How are you on repairs right now, busy? I want to SS upgrade a FP40. I have two NIB that I would like to send to you or purchase a FP40 from your stock ready to go, if you are busy, you choose I'll do either.

Your Friend in PAMPA
Mike Clark

>I will make but one comment here, and that is that all of
>what has been aired here on the forum in the last few days
>wuld probably not have surfaced here had it not been for one
>unfortunate statement by John, himself, in the Stunt News
>suggesting that such an award should not be given--to
>anybody. But let's cool it. I am sure it will take care of
>itself, and Warren will be given the (in my opinion
>deserved) award. So, let's cool it.

I am in complete agreement with virtually this entire commentary.

There's a minor issue right now. That's all it is, a disagreement. These happen all the time. It's inevitable. They have happened many times in the past and will happen again many times in the future. It's completely unavoidable.

It doesn't help anything to read a bunch of innuendo into anything if you aren't directly involved in, and then extrapolate it to any absurd conclusions. So far, the EC transmissions on this and related topics have been uniformly polite and professional. I know, I have seen all official traffic. This includes all the principles. No one is ranting and raving.

We have had some disagreements on some points but no one has seen fit to go over the edge. I am willing to almost guarantee that it's going to stay this way. This is not some sort of mysterious cult - they are guys just like everyone else who like flying model airplanes and wanted to contribute their assistance to an organization that makes that more enjoyable.

As far as I know, at this time, there is nothing at all happening or in work that will consequentially change any aspect of PAMPA functioning. This includes NATs, rules, bylaws, Stunt News, what ever. Sport and competition fliers have equal and identical access to the magazine, and to their EC members (through which you can express your opinions). We have an election with fine people of good character in all the races.

So I see no need at all to go off on tangents, hypothetical situations, perceived old scores being settled, or what have you. PAMPA business is being conducted the way it should be, through the elected representives and any substantive actions are reported (read latest Stunt News for meeting minutes). There are internal debates but if these result in any actions, I can assure you they will be reported as they happened.

If you want PAMPA to change, it can and will, but it has to happen through written proposals via the EC. That's how it works. We have a viable process, and please take advantage of that. Most of the problems in the past have resulted from people wanting things changed but not being patient enough or willing or able to follow through the very simple process it takes. And frequently becoming frustrated that no one just drops all the rules and just does it for them.

Despite a narrowly held opinion to the contrary, that's how it has always worked, at least since the "modern era" (started, to my mind in, in the Tom Dixon/Don McClave time frame). Until recently, there has been very little disagreement as all EC members were of similar background and experience, and thus there was usually unanimity. Now, it's not exactly like that any more, but the same principle apply.

It's all in your hands, ultimately, as bylaws changes are made by full membership vote.

So I strongly urge everyone to sit down, take a deep breath, and just sleep on it for a few nights. Then try to come back an look at it with a fresh and objective view.

Brett Buck
PAMPA District 10 Director.

>(snip If you want PAMPA to change, it can and will, but it has
>to happen through written proposals via the EC. That's how
>it works. We have a viable process, and please take
>advantage of that. Most of the problems in the past have
>resulted from people wanting things changed but not being
>patient enough or willing or able to follow through the very
>simple process it takes. And frequently becoming frustrated
>that no one just drops all the rules and just does it for them.
>(snip)

I might add to that comment that sometimes others don't agree with our idea for change. We ask for changes, we suggest changes, we even propose changes, but they don't come about because those in charge (and that can include the entire electorate) doesn't agree with our "suggestions". If I want red carpet and you want blue carpet, one of us isn't going to get what he wants. We may even end up with green. And compromise is not always the answer. "A compromise is an agreement that nobody likes." Sometimes our proposals are rejected, and for better or for worse we live with them. As they say in baseball, sometimes the best trades were the ones that were never made.

I find it interesting to note how conflicts/disagreements/interpersonal difficulties, and such, always, or sometimnes get preceived as negative...When actually it is a natural "healthy" response regarding intra/interpersonal unease. How these issues are expressed, now thats a different subject... I have been around stunt long enough to understand and witness how unresolved conflicts can and do lead to indirect consequences for everyone involved... We are human, and prone to behaving in ways that are destructive, esecially when difficult important issues go unresolved or are choked off by the cliches like " come on everyone can't we be friends" stuff....Yes we are friends, and friends argue, disagree ,get mad, want to hurt each other, that is natural and the substance in which healthy bonds and relationships are based around..So I support conflict, I support airing these issues, I support the diversity of this hobby, and most of all I support directly resolving the issues that have been raised..Denial that they even exist, pertending things are okay when they are not, will not move this organization in a positive direction..Maybe SSW is just one safe place aspects of these issues can be acknowledged and worked through-Just a thought, and expressed opinoin.
thanks David

We are human, and prone to behaving in
>ways that are destructive, esecially when difficult
>important issues go unresolved or are choked off by the
>cliches like " come on everyone can't we be friends"
>stuff....Yes we are friends, and friends argue, disagree
>,get mad, want to hurt each other, that is natural and the
>substance in which healthy bonds and relationships are based
>around..So I support conflict, I support airing these
>issues, I support the diversity of this hobby, and most of
>all I support directly resolving the issues that have been
>raised..Denial that they even exist, pertending things are
>okay when they are not, will not move this organization in a
>positive direction..

Bingo! You just encapsulated my very last District 10 column.

Avoiding issues just allows them to fester, and in the long run it makes everything worse. But it does require both sides in any conflict to be willing to attempt to solve it in a positive and constructive way, and let it stay solved.