Stuka Stunt Control Line Forum
Archive, 2000–2021 · recovered from the Internet Archive
Forums › Stuka Stunt Main Forum

PAMPA Election

Stuka Stunt Main Forum · 23 of 23 known posts recovered

Jack Weston · Jul 25, 2003 10:32 AM

#0 source
I was at Muncie for the annual PAMPA meeting. One of six points of busines brought up by Richard Peabody, regarding counting votes for the various PAMPA elections.

As I understand, the votes are counted by a VOTING MEMBER! This seems like a rather non-conventional process to me?

Rich proposed or addressed the issue of an independent agency The (AMA) counting the votes which, to me sounds like an absolutely ideal situation.

So, my question is "where did this go?" Was it tabled? Who will in fact, count the votes in the upcoming PAMPA presidential activity?

Alan Hahn · Jul 25, 2003 12:04 PM

#1 source
Well I don't normally like to get into things like this ("PAMPA-gate"), but I think I would just trust whoever is doing the counting.

In our club however we have a show of hands. If we let the officers count the ballots, we would never be able to elect anyone----most are desperately trying to avoid serving! We have another saying, if an officer does a good job, we will consider offering them clemency, if not, they havve to serve another year.

Alan

Bob Reeves · Jul 25, 2003 12:48 PM

#2 source
I am not disagreeing with this idea but this is almost like treading on an old Indian burial site. Treading lightly and approaching it from a "I want to help" position may get better results than "this is wrong and it needs fixing".

Just an observation..
Bob Reeves

jjnotsew · Jul 25, 2003 02:11 PM

#7 source
This wasn't meant to cast aspersions, I guess I was surprised at The Presidents' comment inferring that Rich was making one.
This was only an observation on organizational procedure.

I am a firm believer in being a part of the solution to a problem not being a part of the problem.

Jack Weston

Brett Buck · Jul 25, 2003 12:50 PM

#3 source
>I was at Muncie for the annual PAMPA meeting. One of six
>points of busines brought up by Richard Peabody, regarding
>counting votes for the various PAMPA elections.
>
>As I understand, the votes are counted by a VOTING MEMBER!
>This seems like a rather non-conventional process to me?
>
> Rich proposed or addressed the issue of an independent
>agency The (AMA) counting the votes which, to me sounds
>like an absolutely ideal situation.
>
>So, my question is "where did this go?" Was it tabled? Who
>will in fact, count the votes in the upcoming PAMPA
>presidential activity?

It went exactly nowhere, as it seems completely unnecessary.

Shareen counts the votes correctly (as she does with scores, all our money, etc.). Suggestions to the contrary are not appreciated, unless you have some evidence. Such evidence does not exist as no improrieties are taking place.

PAMPA will continue to count our own votes. Period.

Brett Buck
PAMPA District 10 Director

Larry Foster · Jul 25, 2003 01:06 PM

#5 source
I agree with you totally on this one Brett. There is no one, more trust worthy more than Shareen.

Larry Foster

Flying Control Line is not a Hobby it's a way of Life.
Be Safe.
Larry Foster

jjnotsew · Jul 25, 2003 02:02 PM

#6 source
This wasn't meant to cast aspersions, I guess I was surprised at The Presidents' comment inferring that Rich was making one.

This was only an observation on organizational procedure.

But, then again, I've been accused of naivete.

Jack Weston

Silly Me · Jul 25, 2003 05:08 PM

#10 source
>Suggestions to the contrary are not appreciated, unless you have
>some evidence.

I didn't read the original post as suggesting anything
was wrong.

People here over-react to simple questions
regarding PAMPA, and read things into them
which are not there.

Circle Mouse Mary · Jul 25, 2003 01:05 PM

#4 source
Hi, Jack!

Welcome to the murky waters of binary hypertext CB Radio! Now that you have aligned yourself with the Antichrist of Stunt you will be known far and wide! I, myself as a disciple have gained many a (er... uh... friend) by being in league with the Devil! Right-on, brother!

Please email me at [email protected] I want to get you in my email directory!

See ya Sunday!
Alan

jjnotsew · Jul 25, 2003 02:38 PM

#8 source
Did I say something wrong?

Jack Weston

TomN · Jul 25, 2003 05:06 PM

#9 source
There is nothing wrong with the current procedures.. unless maybe you live in Florida.. They have some surplus voting machines, but you might need the supreme court to count the chads!

Tom N

Brett Buck · Jul 25, 2003 07:52 PM

#11 source
>Did I say something wrong?

No. My comments were directed to a general audience. But it's not a particularly good idea, because it's unnecessary.

The *universally negative* reaction of the PAMPA EC, and most of the members at the meeting, to this suggestion was based on unfortunate past experiences.

For the record, I think everyone would prefer that PAMPA members not approach the AMA directly on matters that have to do with PAMPA internal issues. General issues, of course, that are AMA issues, by all means approach them. But it's less than preferable to make requests on PAMPA's behalf or in PAMPA's name without anyone in the EC even knowing about it.

That's what Frank (and I, and most of the guys sitting at the table up front) reacted to initially. The topic itself has been hashed to death in both public and private, and continuing to beat a dead horse certainly begs the question of why.

Brett

F4FGuy · Jul 25, 2003 08:08 PM

#12 source
Ron B.
F4Fguy

HMMMMMM,let's see,we could raise the dues a couple of hundred,and stop fooling around with things like Stunt News,and with the extra money we could hire Price Waterhouse to count the votes.YEAH,YEAH, THAT"S THE TICKET!!!!!

IT"S MODEL AIRPLANES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ron B.

"Chad" Everett · Jul 26, 2003 08:06 AM

#13 source
All the hullabaloo makes it sound like something fishy IS going on. Hmmm.
Chad

Brett Buck · Jul 26, 2003 10:23 AM

#15 source
>All the hullabaloo makes it sound like something fishy IS
>going on. Hmmm.

You are correct, something fishy IS going on.

People who don't have the guts to use their real names, Chad, (or send hate mail labelled "PRIVATE", or whisper gossip to their friends, etc, or approach outside organizations to solve internal problems, etc.), spend significant amounts of their time bashing, defaming, insulting, etc. the people who volunteer their free time making sure that the event honest and fair. This bashing is never followed up by anything like actual evidence of anything wrong - instead, it's always by innuendo, rumor, snide and sarcastic commentary, all of which leaves an impression of something crooked going on, without having to prove it, or even justify it.

For your future reference, Chad, innuendo and inference does not constitute evidence, and anonymous posting does not enhance credibility.

Shareen spends close to the equivalent to a full-time job keeping track of PAMPA business - memberships, accounting, reverse-engineering advertising accounts, sending renewals, counting ballots. Not to mention running the NATs tabulating, running the Team Trials tabulating, and nowadays, trying to get all the ducks in a row for the W/C.

There has never once been any actual evidence of anything with even the patina of malfeasance, or anything less than total dedication to complete honesty. The payoff has been repeated cheap shots, snide commentary about foxes guarding henhouses, Sekrit Kabals, and everything short of kidnapping the Lindberg baby.

It's wrong, it's unfair, and no one deserves this sort of treatment, much less someone who's doing a hard job in a manner beyond reproach.

It's really not limited to Shareen - Tom Morris, Warren Tiahrt, Gary McClellan, every PAMPA president in recent years, several district directors, have all been the targets at various times. All for the "crime" of not cow-towing to those who want to manipulate the event to their own advantage in one sense or another. The obsession with PAMPA politics has, for some people, become pathological.

If this seems like an overreaction, bear in mind I get to see both the public and private side of this tawdry and tiresome little act. Thank the good Lord that it's really only a few people. The vast majority of PAMPA members appreciate the work done on their behalf, and just want to fly model airplanes in a fair and conducive environment, and get a neat magazine, and have the (arguably) best and most comprehensive AMA SIG of all.

If this makes it sound like I am angry and sick and tired of this nonsense, that's an accurate characterization.

Brett

Crist_Rigotti · Jul 26, 2003 11:19 AM

#16 source
What Brett said!

Len, when are you going to REQUIRE registration with real names in their profiles?

I'm amazed as to what people will say hiding behind some assumed name. Those people should be ashamed of themselves.


Crist Rigotti
"A driver trying to be a pilot"

Brett Buck · Jul 26, 2003 12:30 PM

#18 source
>What Brett said!
>
>Len, when are you going to REQUIRE registration with real
>names in their profiles?
>
>I'm amazed as to what people will say hiding behind some
>assumed name. Those people should be ashamed of themselves.

But I'm sure they aren't. It's all in response to perceived slights in the past, to which they are "fighting back". Like I said - borderline pathological.

What's so tragicomic about the "anonymous posters" is that I'm sure they're convinced of their Machiavellian cleverness in posting "anonymously". Guess they never heard of "traceroute"!!

The entire effort (no doubt linked to the upcoming election) is about as subtle and manipulative as brick through a plate glass window.

And I don't know these people think they are accomplishing. I consider both Keith and John to be men of honor with a sense of decency, and they won't likely respond any better to this sort of nonsense than Frank or the rest of the PAMPA EC.

Brett

LNeumann · Jul 26, 2003 03:29 PM

#21 source
>What Brett said!
>
>Len, when are you going to REQUIRE registration with real
>names in their profiles?
>
>I'm amazed as to what people will say hiding behind some
>assumed name. Those people should be ashamed of themselves.
>
>
>Crist Rigotti
>"A driver trying to be a pilot"

Well, Crist, much as I hate to, I am going to be requiring registration as soon as the new version goes online. We have the 1.21 software up and running, but there are some bugs still to be worked out. I want it right when it goes online, and David (the author) has the updates ready to be released shortly. Of course, he has been saying that for a while, and I think we keep coming up with a few things for him to work on.

Anyway, when we switch over, registration will be required in order to post on all forums except for one new addition which will be for people experiencing problems. There are new links added so people can contact me with problems, new FAQ's that have been written to (hopefully) help people sort out the features, and a few new features that will be added.

I had really hoped we would have it up by now, but I am in total agreement. I do not like the anonymous posters, either.

Leonard Neumann

Currell · Jul 26, 2003 09:07 AM

#14 source

and with the extra money we could hire Price Waterhouse

Anyone but Authur Anderson...Currell

Brett Buck · Jul 26, 2003 12:01 PM

#17 source

>So, my question is "where did this go?" Was it tabled? Who
>will in fact, count the votes in the upcoming PAMPA
>presidential activity?

As someone recently reminded me, the PAMPA bylaws require the secretary treasurer to count the ballots. A deviation from this would require a change to the bylaws which has not been proposed, let alone approved.

The issue is closed until such time that the bylaws change.

Brett

Yosarian · Jul 26, 2003 01:00 PM

#19 source
"That's some catch, that Catch-22."

Yosarian

Brett Buck · Jul 26, 2003 01:44 PM

#20 source
>"That's some catch, that Catch-22."
>
>Yosarian

No, anonymous poster, if you don't like the situation, do something about it, like make a proposal to change the bylaws. There are existing procedures that you can avail yourself of, just get off your dead posterior and use them. Don't blame the system for your own limitations.

Of course, this will also require you to actually come out of your little dark corner into the light of day.

There is no possibility that the PAMPA bylaws, or anything else of consequence, will be changed or altered to accomodate snide internet commentary from unknown sources.

Brett

N42222 · Jul 26, 2003 10:04 PM

#22 source
I personally "filter" the postings I read. If it is unregistered I simply ignore it! "Consider the source" is usually good advise and if it's not registered, there ain't no source. Which helps me heed an old retired airline pilot's credo-"Keep a cool stool!". Best regards,

Dale Gleason