Stuka Stunt Main Forum · 106 of 106 known posts recovered
Dennis M
But PAMPA also puts out a magazine. It is called Stunt News. And because it includes articles on how to build, how to fly, what kind of motor to use and how to get it running, and on and on, it appeals to people who are not competition minded. Anyone can join and get the magazine if they so desire. I encourage them to do so. Not because it benefits PAMPA, but because it benefits them. They do not need to compete to join PAMPA. However, PAMPA is still competition stunt.
When people are paying their "dues" they are buying the magazine, that is all. If people want to join and get the magazine, that is fine. If they do not, that is fine also. I don't really care if PAMPA loses members. I don't really care if PAMPA gains members. That is not what it is all about. PAMPA is control line competition stunt. That is what its charter says. That is what it is all about.
When you join the orgainization (and anyone can join--even people who fly RC or just like to go fishing) you pay the yearly fees and you get the yearly magazine. You get every issue for the year that you pay your dues. And that is what the money you pay goes for. Everyone who contributes to the magazine, does so for free. All of the columnists, the editors, the publisher, all donate their time. They get paid nothing. So when you pay your yearly fees, you are paying for the magazine and nothing more. If you don't pay, the magazine is not printed for you, and the organization saves that cost. If you do pay, you get that magazine, and the costs of that magazine are hopefully covered by the fees that you paid.
PAMPA gains nothing by your membership. PAMPA loses nothing by your not being a member. It is truly marlarky to think that PAMPA is losing thousands of dollars because some people dropped out. They lost the "dues", but they saved an equal or greater amount by not providing a magazine for them. It may, in fact, be that PAMPA gains by your not being a part of the organization.
Some people dropped out because they weren't competition. Fine. Some people dropped out because of the economy. Fine. Some just didn't like the magazine. Fine. the interesting thing is, you don't even need to be a member of PAMPA to compete, just AMA. So, if you don't want to be a part of PAMPA, fine. It is your choice, and your loss. But remember the purpose for which it was chartered and don't try to make it into something else simply because there are non-competitions who have joined (and we welcome them) simply because they wanted the magazine. Quite frankly, if you are a control line stunt enthusiast and buy just one magazine a year, I would think this would be your first choice. But don't think that just because you join the organization to buy the magazine, that you should now be able to change the purpose for which PAMPA exists. And don't think that you are doing PAMPA a favor, either, by paying your "dues". The magazine you get in return costs that much to produce.
This whole thing of the Presidential election has gotten way out of hand. PAMPA is not a grass roots organization. PAMPA is not a Sunday flyer organization. And PAMPA is not losing money because it has lost members. If you want a sport flyer's organization, then maybe you ought to start one. Or if you want to promote control line as a sport, then maybe that is what you ought to do. But that is not the purpose of PAMPA.
Why is it that every time someone runs for public office, be it President of the United States or mayor of Podunk Hollow, they think they have got to change everything that was done before? "We have got to build it bigger, greater, better." And then we, who are suckered into electing them, think that by electing this person we will now greatly improve our (pick one: City, county, state, country). I just want to elect a person who will do the job that he was elected (and constituted) to do. Leave the job of saving the world to Clark Kent.
Leonard Neumann
Larry Foster
Flying Control Line is not a Hobby it's a way of Life.
Be Safe.
Larry Foster
SteveObviously the membership of PAMPA includes a majority who do not compete at a top level in contests. For us Stunt is fun (a sport as in sport flying?) an art form maybe (I think so), but one done as a hobby .
Why not do the obvious and include the membership rank and file in. It seems a few of the accomplished (there are many top flyers who apparently do not feel this way) wish to hold on to the PAMPA leadership in a way that feels exclusionary even dictatorial. How about a wider view of the sport that welcomes those who wish to be appreciators of the best while they do what their time and ability allows.
Unfortunately, it has been my experience, when ideas like these are raised about PAMPA a few of the old guard take the opportunity to sound high handed and arrogant as though they know what's best for the rest. PAMPA has grown beyond the top twenty, way beyond the top stunt competitors, look at the number of members.
How about a leadership attitude that works with the (surprise) potentially growing appeal of control line flying and wishes to foster it. Seems that would be the best for everyone.
Dennis Moritz
PAMPA is being run in accordance with the bylaws, and statement of formation - i.e. to provide competitors a common voice in the running of the event and provide a means of communication for stunt fliers (implicitly competition). That's what it is for. Means to change the bylaws exist if someone wants to change them. and there is popular support.
In actual fact, Stunt News (which is essentially PAMPA to the world) has deviated *greatly* from this focus to provide a lot of general-interest information. Very, very small amounts of SN are relevant or even interesting to competition fliers, and next to nothing of interest to top competitors appears any more. It's already "sport flier and caual competitor gazette".
As far as "voting for president" goes, please explain what you mean. The president is one person with one EC vote, just like the rest of us. That's just as true whether it's Keith Trostle, John Brodak, or Joe Blow.
Frank took over at a time when we almost cancelled the team trials because someone threatened to shoot the chief judge. The entire event was in jeopardy of being destroyed. and there wouldn't be a PAMPA, or Stunt News, or whatever undefined thing you are really getting at.
Now, our biggest "problem" is the content of Stunt News, which is already 99% of the way to your stated desire. Frank was what you would probably describe as "old guard", and he (and the EC over the years) seems to have done an awfully good job.
Everybody in PAMPA has a representative. It's your district director (of which I am one). If you feel poorly represented, then it's your district director's responsibility. In most cases where people (like yourself) are complaining about lack of PAMPA representation, it's because you haven't bothered to pursue it through the available channels.
I have no idea in which district you reside. But what the heck, I'm here, and several other directors watch this space, so please, explain right here, specifically and exactly ,what we (PAMPA EC) should do to address you needs. Not vague FUD complaints, but specific and well-thought out proposals. If it's legitimate, I'll make sure your district director addresses it, or take it to the EC myself.
We're listening. The floor is yours....
Brett Buck
PAMPA District 10 Director
Ok, since that doesn't seem to have gotten anything, I'll try a different tack.
How exactly is the "lack of representation" manifesting itself? I'm challenging you, but I genuinely want to know. I hear this sort of thing frequently from the usual quarters, and I have no idea how it comes about.
Here's a golden opportunity to actually initiate change, and it won't take an election to do it. I am trying to pin you down a bit, but you have to define the issue in specific terms before anyone can possibly begin to address it.
Brett
Dennis, I do not wish to make this into a debate, and certainly do not wish to make this into a debate as to who is best suited as President of PAMPA. But take your last statement, for instance: PAMPA is not constituted to simply "work with the...growing appeal of control line flying..." It is constituted to work with control line competition stunt. Yes, PAMPA members should and will help up and comers. I find the competition control line stunt community exceptionally open to helping anybody who wants to learn. If a fellow competitor crashes, they will help rebuild his plane so he can beat them. If a newby comes along, they will give him all the help they are able. I overheard Windy over the week end offering a youngster the opportunity to come over and stay with him in his home and learn. He offered to take time out to help him. That is not the point. The PAMPA members will do this. But that is not the function of the PAMPA organization. We need to realize this. And PAMPA is not here to foster and grow control line in general. We ought to realize this as well, also. The PAMPA members will help, but that is not the purpose of the organization. It is competition control line stunt.
And as I stated above, that goes far beyhond your limited eyesight of the top 20 (assumed at the Nats Open). Remember, at the Nats alone we have 40 some competitors in the Open competition, another in Advanced, and now beginner and Intermediate and limited entries in Junior and Senior. (They are out there, but the Robby Grubers can't even drive yet. They need a family to support them and who are dedicated to bringing them. How many families are willing to do that?) And, oh, yes, let's not forget Old Time and Classic.
And there are far more competitors who attend the local meets than who are able to give up the time and money to attend the Nats. They are also a part of PAMPA and part of the competition aspect.
This is not "arrogance" or a "bristling...defensive attitude". This is simply fact that you have (deliberately) tried to twist by continuing to say it is "top twenty" verses the rest of the people. It is not anybody against anybody. And I (nor do you) truly do not know how many there are who are non competitors who are members of PAMPA compared to those who are into competition (at least to some degree). I hope there are a lot. They can learn a lot. But they are not paying "dues" to make an organization run. All membership fee increases have been a result of the growing cost of producing the magazine. PAMPA is not making money off of anybody's dues, and this is an unfortunate assertion that John included in his campaign brochure that makes me cringe. And the comments that the "little guy" has no imput are also erroneous. You have District representatives. We do the same with our city and our country. If you have input, you talk to your representative. There will, of course (with anything) be contrary views, and the representative must go with what he feels is best for the organization (or city or country).
Why do people think that because people don't always agree with them that nobody is listening to them? Why do people think that because they do not always get their way that they do not have a voice? Why do people always think that change is always needed or that "new blood" will....(pick something). Although the sport flyer is encouraged to get the magazine (Stunt News) which means join PAMPA, this does not mean that PAMPA is now a sport flyer's organization or that the sport flyers are supporting it. The sport flyers who are members are getting the benefit of the input that is put into the magazine and they are merely paying the cost of producing their copy and getting the benefit of the free effort that is put into it.
I don't expect a lot of carrier guys or combat or speed (or free flight or radio control) guys to join PAMPA. Guys interested in control line stunt for sport, yes, but they (and you and everyone else who is a member) need to remember that the organization is constituted to oversee comtroline COMPETITION stunt at all levels.
And it is NOT top 20. Yes, at that fallacious assumption I bristle!
Leonard Neumann
See Ya
Peabody
George
George
I'm not certain that AMA membership is required for one to belong to PAMPA. One must be an AMA member to participate in contests in the U.S., it's true. But are all those members who live in countries other than the US of A required to join the AMA in order to belong to PAMPA? I don't think so.
Paul
The Old Sourdough
Ruksakinmakiak, Alaska, US of A
Once again, Rich,--not unlike much of John's campaign literature--you're just plain wrong.
AMA membership is encouraged by PAMPA but not required for membership. A review of the bylaws would have helped you learn the facts and prevented publication of speculation.
While on the subject of the bylaws... John Brodak would have been well advised to do a little research as well. To wit: (the very first thing you'd read if you bothered) "Article I -- Name and Purpose: (...statement of name and and abbreviation of same omitted)... The purpose of the corporation shall be to promote and improve the CONTROL LINE PRECISION AEROBATICS EVENT (emphasis added)."
It is worth noting that in his mailing John used the word "stunt" and/or the phrase "control line precision aerobatics" exactly once each in the space of four full pages of proclamations regarding the future of the organization.
Both of those mentions were specifically directed at relagating the competition directed activities of PAMPA to a "separate, select comittee". In other words, as an organization whose purpose is "to promote and improve" a specific form of control line competition, John Brodak as President would prefer to unilaterally shunt off any consideration of that purpose to a corner of the field where they can't inconvenience his vision of what the organization SHOULD have been.
As Len and Brett have made perfectly clear, the bylaws (should anyone choose to inform themselves of the information contained within them) clearly spell out the way that changes to the organization can be made. Not by unilateral fiat of a newly elected President (whose conflict of interest has not been mentioned but stands as the invisible 900 pound gorilla in the room) but through appropriate input to the Board of Trustees, with the subsequent actions of the President to ratify and implement them spelled out as well.
Once again..."Article XII -- Amendments to Bylaws: Any active member or ('of' in the original, a misprint)Trustee may submit a proposed amendment to the Trustees at any time. Upon such a submission, the Trustees shall determine if the proposed amendment should be presented to the membership, and if so, the exact wording thereof and the time of presentation. All proposed amendments and action taken theron shall be reported to the memebership in the next issue of the newsletter following receipt of the proposal. Presentation of a proposed amendment to the membership shall be made in the newsletter, and adoption thereof shall occur only on a vaforable vote of a two thirds majoirty of those members responding."
Some (perhaps like John and Rich) might wonder who these mysterious "Trustees" are. They appear to think of them as the cabal that has run PAMPA as some sort of fiefdom. In fact...again, in the bylaws... the Board of Trustees is composed of all elected officers and selected appointed PAMPA members, specifically the Membership Chairman and the Newletter editor. This august body includes, TA DAH!, the District Directors of which Mr. Brodak is one.
Guys, if John was as committed to changing PAMPA's way of business as he would have you believe in order to get himself elected President, don't you think he would at least have attempted first to utilize the resources available to him while serving as a Director to attempt such a considerable change during his service.
I stand second to noone in my admiration for the things John has accomplished and the products he has made available to us with his commercial, for profit, operation at Brodak Models. In my opinion, however, we shouldn't let our appreciation of his efforts in that area cloud our vision of what PAMPA is and what purpose it serves. Many individuals have contributed mightily to make PAMPA the pre-eminent SIG in Control Line modeling ... while actively pursuing the promotion of CONTROL LINE PRECISION AEROBATICS.
Among the top rank of those who contributed to make PAMPA into that pre-eminent organization is Keith Trostle. A man of great integrity (serving our country in the highest levels of military and space administration), a proven leader (originator and first president of the entire concept), a faithful and repected administrator (ran several team trials events and National CLPA events), official (numerous appearances as a judge at national and world championship events)a championship level modeler in multiple disciplines including National Championships in both CLPA and C/L Scale and a man whose commitment to the organization is in lock step with the purpose stated in the bylaws.
Finally, Keith has no axe to grind, no hidden agenda or potential conflict of interest in pursuing the Presidency. He has responded to the entreaties of many PAMPA members, including myself, who revere and cherish PAMPA for what it was and continues to be, a voice for the promotion and improvement of Control Line Precision Aerobatics...precisely as stated in the bylaws of the corporation.
Ted Fancher
Hey, guys. I really can't let that slide unchallenged. This sort of unsupported, non-specific accusation is the sort of thing that makes people turn red!
While it may be true that competition flyers approach the hobby in a more serious manner than do sport flyers, we're all doing the same thing to the level we enjoy. To do the things we each do requires a certain amount of time specfically aimed at accomplishing our personal challenges but that certainly doesn't mean that we look down our noses at the way in which others persue success in their own version of toy airplanes.
Just as a for instance, I challenge you to find instances of competition flyers initiating or interjecting into an existing thread on SSW any pejorative statements regarding the manner in which sport flyers choose to enjoy the hobby. On the other hand, charges such as you've both made are fairly common. To what end?
Such statement serve only to divide us. Unless a specific example can be used to illustrate a viable path for overcoming the slights you feel, a generic statement painting all competition flyers as snobs is not a very useful means of resolving any such perception.
Ted
We all fumble and fight to learn how to fly. And we crash. And we... (well, you know the drill). But I have found competiton flyers always ready and able to help. I was a "Nats bum" for many years. I would go to the Nats and watch and learn. And I always asked questions. I always wanted to know, "Why?" And you know something, whenever I asked, people were always willing and anxious to answer. Now asking just before they go up to fly is not a good time. And sometimes when they, themselves, are experiencing problems, is not a good time to engage in chit chat concerning your problems, either. But I have always felt that the control line stunt guys were always ready and willing and anxious to help you seek answers to your questions and to help you in the pursuit of your hobby your way.
There is an RC field close to where we fly. I used to go over there on occasion just to watch a little. I quit going. Why? Because the RC sport flyers who were flying there (yes, sport flyers) were some of the biggest snobs I have ever seen. EVERY time we would go over there we would be asked the question, "When are you going to GRADUATE to RC?" (Yea, well, when are you going to try Real Control where the handle is connected to the airplane?)
All of the control line flyers I have met are a different breed. And the guys who have honed their skills to be able to fly in competition are the ones who have much to give to the hobby and are anxious to do so at every turn.
Remember guys, PAMPA is not an elitest group. And it certainly is not (as the assertion at the beginning of this thread implied) an effort to keep it as just the "top 20". The very fact that the AMA age classes kept many people from competing because the less skilled felt they were outclassed by those with greater skills led to PAMPA starting the skill classes so that anybody can compete with people of his own skill class. Remember, this was PAMPA that did this. PAMPA also embraced the Old Time and Classic events. And it continues to encourage junior and senior age level competitors as well. I remember Frank McMillin--yes, our outgoing PAMPA president--walking up to the junior competitor who did not win at the FAI trials and welcoming him and encouraging him to continue to compete. I overheard Windy inviting this same young up-and-comer to come to his house for a week's stay and offering to spend time with him. (What a bunch of snobs, huh?)
PAMPA is about competition, yes. But PAMPA embraces fliers of all skill levels, and provides competition for them as well. No, it is not constituted as a sport fliers organization. But its members are there to help any sports flier improve his skills in any way he wishes. And this forum is dedicated to helping them as well. It is just one more member's effort, because I am a member of PAMPA.
Leonard Neumann
Craig Beskow
Here's a scary thought. Maybe someday the majority of the PAMPA membership will want to change what PAMPA is all about. Hey, they might even try to do this by starting with the presidency of PAMPA.
Would it be a bad thing for PAMPA to evole into something other than what it's charter currently states?
Here is something else to consider. 1800 plus or minus PAMPA members but barely even 10% of that total competes at the National level. If you look at the regional contest results posted in Stunt News you basically see the same names, of which the majority of, are the same people that fly at the NATS. To me there appears to be a sleeping giant in PAMPA and it's not the serious competitor type.
I think John Brodak is onto something and the proof appears to be as plain as the nose on your unmodified Banshee. The BRODAK Fly-In has become as large as the NATS and shows signs of getting bigger. And it's not about competition, ask anyone that's been there and they'll tell you it's the most fun they have during the year.
Johns goals may not be in perfect alignment with the current charter of PAMPA, but his goals are GOOD ONES, and this is purely my own thoughts, but if I were to do what he wants to do I would certainly look for the best way to reach the largest number of modelers.
Hmmmmm what could that be? Maybe spokesman for a special interest group? Perhaps one that has several thousand members with a highly polished publication?
We have two very good canidates running for the top spot in PAMPA.
We also have two very different philosophies of the direction PAMPA should be taking. We have John Brodaks and we have the top 180.
PAMPA will not lose anything by expanding it's mission statement.
regards,
Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
Rick: Food for thought.
Say John is elected and is successful in changing PAMPA (which I doubt since the by laws will most likely prevent it) are the sport fliers going to step up and do the things they want done, write articles for the news letter, run the Nats, run the World Championships, produce the news letter if the current people don’t want the changes or are they going to just complain like they do now and expect John to run it all. You guys have the ability to change what so important to you now Stunt News, yet I've seen only a few who do and a lot who complain. We have a body of people who run PAMPA very well, take into account you may loose them. Be careful what you wish for you may get it.
Also remember that the Brodak contest is still competition. Competition is the heart of PAMPA. The skill clases are the PAMPA classes or should we also go back to open, Sr and Jr.
Larry
Flying Control Line is not a Hobby it's a way of Life.
Be Safe.
Larry Foster
Larry,
First of all I've never complained about PAMPA or Stunt News.
I have complained about some of the attitudes that exist inside this organization, that is my right as a member of PAMPA. I get particulaly annoyed when someone proclaims that the stunt community is comprised of nothing but nice, honorable, pleasant people, when in fact there are just as many a** holes in stunt as any other part of modeling. Hell I ought to know I'm one of the biggest a** holes in PAMPA. Whether John Brodak wants to change PAMPA is up to John Brodak. What I'd like to see is a different attitude about the whole relationship stunt and PAMPA should play to the entire hobby. PAMPA should, in my opinion, remain focused on Stunt, however I want the leadership of PAMPA to find more ways to make not only stunt more popular but I want them to explore ways to tie us all closer together.
Finally, you are right, there is competition at Brodaks, but are you comparing the competition that happens in Johns back yard to the competition that happens in Muncie?
regards,
Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
Jim T. I wish you would have left your post alone because it was dead on and you did not offend me or a multitude of others who feel exactly the same.
To me competition is competition, it's a place where I can gather with the people I hold dearest in life, next to my daughters and grandson. When everything has failed me in life the people whom I fly models with and compete against have always been there. The competition is the icing on the cake and be it for a national championship or an apple it's all the same to me. If it were not for PAMPA and the skill classes, stunt would not be where it is today. So this is why I am so passionate when it comes to changing the roots of PAMPA. So much of Stunt News is devoted to the less then expert flier and it still does not seem to be enough.
Larry Foster
Flying Control Line is not a Hobby it's a way of Life.
Be Safe.
Larry Foster
"catdaddy"
I'm confused. Do you mean to say that all those pilots at John's "contest" weren't trying to come out on top? That they didn't want to "win" the "competition"? That John's party wouldn't be just a bit more fun if they came out on top?
I think I can guarantee that every time a stunt pilot hooks up his lines at a competition it is with the intent of flying the very best flight he can manage and with the hope that today it will be good enough to be declared "The Champ".
Not a thing wrong with that. "That" is precisely the reason PAMPA exists.
So, yes, I guess I would certainly compare "competition" at Brodak to "competition" at the Nats.
Ted
Ted,
Thanks for your input. Brett as well. Len, you're too wordy, as am I. But your heart is in the right place, certainly.
For all who do not want to read my blah, blah, go over Ted's response again. In my opinion, he has once again nailed the situation, even if mildly glossing over the issue of (potential) conflict of interest.
Dan Rutherford
But I agree that PAMPA is the CLPA competition SIG and should stay that way. If people want to have an organzation dedicated to promoting general CL flying and modeling, let them do so! The hobby needs one, anyway! But keep PAMPA about competition and setting high goals. The Top 20 gives doofusses like me something to shoot for and drives us to do a little better, and keep trying.
"the issue of (potential) conflict of interest."
"not unlike much of John's campaign literature--you're just plain wrong"
Would Somebody please inform me about the "Gorilla", the (potential) conflict of interest and what part(s) of the campaign literature were wrong. I haven't voted yet and want to make an educated decision.
I'm Brand New to PAMPA. I joined for three years to "Learn" about a hobby that I enjoy. I've never been to a contest/meet/fly-in/ NATS or any other "Organized" Model Airplane (Anything) of any kind.
Now that I have paid my dues and receive "Stunt News" I get a Ballot asking me to vote for a PAMPA President. Would someone enlighten me?
I've never meet Trostle or Brodak. In the past I have gotten allot of help from the guys that post on this forum.
Regards,
John Jolley
District V
"After reading the posts as well as the campaign statements that were printed in Stunt News (I did not recieve a mailing from John Brodak) I voted and mailed my ballot."
John,
Thanks for your interest. I'll spend a few minutes responding on the forum in order that others can share in the give and take.
First of all, the 900 # gorilla and potential conflict of interest vis a vis CLPA.
John Brodak is a very successful marketer and promoter of goods, services and products of interest to modelers. He is an especially good promoter of himself as well.
Amongst other endeavors John makes his living selling products to c/l flyers. It is to his distinct advantage to have a marketing tool like STUNT NEWS available for his use in that end. Despite the fact that PAMPA was originated and, by its own bylaws, empowered to promote competition CLPA John would prefer to ignore that purpose and restructure it in a form more beneficial to his vision...and more generic in it's interests and, thus, beneficial to his financial interests. While I don't accuse John of pursuing the presidency for that purpose, the question of conflict of interest clearly must be addressed.
PAMPA has existed since 1973 specifically as an organization to promote and improve the CLPA Competition event. Specifically charged with administering the National CLPA event and the FAI Team Trials. John, this isn't just something I've made up. It is the very first article of incorporation in the PAMPA bylaws.
John has for several years been a member of the very bodies he accuses of disregarding the membership . He is now and has been a district director elected by those in his district to represent their interest and to forward to the Board of Trustees any desire on their or his own part to alter the published purpose of the organization he chose to join, knowing full well its purpose. In that position John has done nothing to combat or attempt to redefine the nonspecific charges he makes against the organization in the first paragraph of the second page.
Re the paragraph where he accuses the body on which he serves of being unresponsive to the membership please note that not a single specific charge is made. Only the generic accusations of nonspecific charges made by un-named persons which "all of us" have heard. These statements are supported by neither facts nor specific allegations. As printed, they appear to be unsupported attempts by John to question the integrity of people who have devoted decades of their lives to making PAMPA an organization whose popularity amongst its devotees is without a peer in the modeling community.
I urge you to ask John SPECIFICALLY what decisions have been made by PAMPA without membership input, either directly or through their representatives on the Board of Trustees. I can very specifically tell you that NO such decisions regarding PAMPA affairs have been made that were not done fully in concert with the dictates of the organization's bylaws.
I should let you know, John, that I know about what I'm addressing through personal experience. I spent four years of my life trying to voluntarily help this organization prosper and fulfill its charter as President. During my administration PAMPA grew at the greatest rate of its history. This was in large part because Tom Morris took over STUNT NEWS and made it the reliable and popular product it has been ever since.
Because I'm very experienced at what dedication of personal time is necessary to do the job--and because I'm equally familiar with the compensation package--I have little patience for people who think those who do the actual work of the organization do so for some great personal benefit. My primary interest in CLPA is in competition. In order to do the job of President my ability to perform at the level I am capable was greatly compromised. That was my compensation.
PAMPA membership is a legitimate issue...but illigitimized by John's characterization of what exactly has happened and why.
This last year PAMPA did, in fact, suffer a loss of membership. Right now membership is 288 below that of a year ago. It is fully reasonable to ask why.
Last year at the PAMPA business meeting held at the nats (by the way, the meeting is held at the nats because the organization was founded at the nats for competition stunt flyers, many of whom attended the nats) it was decided by the Board of Trustees that it was necessary and desireable to increase dues to maintain the viablity of the magazine as the members preferred it and to protect the organization against even more postage increases.
AS SPECIFIED IN THE BYLAWS, such a change must be approved by the membership. To implement the vote in a timely manner so as to know how much the renewal rates would be it was decided to mail the initiative on the dues increase via a specific mailing. A special election mailing is a not inconsiderable expense to a small organization such as PAMPA. Remember, we're talking a first class mailing to each member along with the cost of producing the ballot and the envelopes for distribution. Postage alone (with international members, too, remember) was in the vicinity of a thousand bucks plus a couple hundred for the paper material. (Oh yes, the actual work of folding, stuffing stamping and mutilating was done by human volunteer labor...quite a bit of it my own)
Once the vote (of the membership, per the bylaws) was returned it was decided to publish the results in STUNT NEWS along with a request for renewals. This was in lieu of the prior practice of sending out a separate mailing with the renewal notice and the ballots for officers and directors . This was a huge mistake which won't be repeated.
Unlike previous years when renewals as a result of the notice were at a very high level (don't ask me for specifics but my wife, Shareen, who has given literally thousands of hours of her life to the benefit of the members of the organization could look it up for you) the percentage of members who responded to the publication in the magazine was a fraction of the norm. Subsequent attempts to remind them turned out to be expensive and of moderate but not complete success. As a result, membership this year is, once again, 288 less than last.
It must also be stated that historically PAMPA membership at the start of any given year (renewals) is generally down about 10%. People who have lost interest, joined for reasons that no longer exist, or--sadly--no longer exist themselves. Historically this shortfall has been made up to one degree or another with new members throughout the year.
Finally, read John's paragraph on page two starting with: "Member input is very important..." Then read the following paragraph and try to make any connection between the quotes in the first paragraph and the allegation in the second. There is no logical support for his apparent allegation that the President is acting unilaterally in opposition to the interests of the members.
Clearly the quotes in the first paragraph from the bylaws outline the responsibilities of the Trustees and the duties of the President. As the kids say nowadays, "well, duh?". If John is implying that somehow the current President, Frank McMillan or his opponent, Keith Trostle is or might in the future be somehow delinquent in fulfilling those responsibilities it is incumbent on him to explain how and in what manner.
Once again, I urge you to ask John specifically what he his alleging in this ephemeral accusation. What exactly does he accuse Frank or (with a crystal ball) Keith of doing that is contrary to the stipulations of the bylaws.
John, Mr. Brodak's entire campaign mailing appears to be an attack against those who have made PAMPA what it is today. There is not a single specific allegation of malfeasance in the entire body of his message. Instead, he engages in subjective, non-specific accusations such as: "comments I've heard over and over'; members feel they don't have any input...; officers do not consult the members" etc. etc. ad nauseum. NEVER, a single specific allegation. He would have the membership accept malfeasance because he alleges it and asks them to elect him because he vows not to do any of the unspoken things he accuses others of doing. And, of course, he won't do so since nobody has a clue exactly what it is that he alleges...just that it's naughty and so are the bad guys who do it.
I respectfully ask that you review this message and my previous one on this thread and also that you read Keith Trostle's message in the new STUNT NEWS. Keith clearly states why he wants to do the job and why he is a good man to do so. I think the clearest evidence of Keith's competetence and capabilities to lead the organization is the fact that it even exists today. A handful of hard working and dedicated people spent large chunks of their lives making PAMPA an organization which attracts large percentages of the handful of people throughout the world who enjoy competitive stunt flying to be life long members. At the forefront of that group was Keith Trostle. We as an organization are blessed that such a man is willing to once again serve us.
I ask that all members seriously consider doing so.
Thanks for your time.
Ted Fancher
YOU'RE SURELY KIDDING! Someone who owns and runs 9 successful businesses HAS TO KNOW THAT NO AUDITOR OR TAX ACCOUNTANT IN THE WESTERN WORLD WOULD EVER ALLOW UNSOLD INVENTORY TO BE COUNTED AS CURRENT REVENUE! On the contrary, if it becomes stale inventory, you might need to think about writing it off! "Fairy land thinking" is an understatement! I was a swing vote until I heard this! I deal with financial statements every day, and I assure you, this would NEVER pass muster! Maybe I need to start a "grassroots" movement to prevent the "future" mis-statement of PAMPA financial statements! THIS IS LUDICROUS! Ted, tell me this is a joke! Better yet, JOHN BRODAK, COME OUT AND DENY THIS! If not, we have a bigger problem to deal with than undefined charges and personal attacks in this election! If Mr. Brodak wins this election, we may have to pay for an annual audit just to make sure the books are straight! Yeah, I know, he can't do it by himself, but come on! Let's get in the real world, at least!
Craig Beskow
Ron Turner
Whether or not John Brodak gets voted in as president of PAMPA, I would hope that nobody (or no one) will leave in protest. Like the US President, PAMPA president cannot , by himself, get any serious change incorporated without concurrence of the board. District reps, cl competition rules committee, etc. He can only guide and recommend.
I personally feel that either party could and would be a good choice. I have had some serious problems with the current group of officers that are currently in office, but hold no grudge and my problems had little if any thing to do with the way PAMPA is run.
I do feel that membership IS important and that if the non-competitors did leave, the orginization WOULD hurt and nobody wants that. I hope that everyone votes and let the results fall as it will and carry on.
Bigiron13 (a sport flier who flies in competitive events only to see how I do as compared to others like me)
And!! to satisfy those who abhore hidden identities behind "handles",
Marvin Denny AMA 499 Wichita, KS
Bigiron13
By the way, Marvin, I enjoyed watching you fly Sunday. Wish we could have cooked up better weather in Dallas, though.
Craig Beskow
Bigiron13
Craig Beskow
For once, we agree 100%. If the bylaws are adhered to, the president has no more of a vote than me or any other EC member. PAMPA is a representational democracy, and never in my time om the EC has anything significant been done by "executive fiat". I would expect that to be just as true no matter who wins.
The real power lies with the members and their representatives, and always has. If you want something done in PAMPA, there are clear and fair ways do get it done, and you have a vote through your district directors. If there are members who feel they are not "getting a voice", then the place to start looking is the District Director - not the president.
I think that this "no voice in PAMPA" stuff is just a matter of FUD, but if there is a an issue, I can certainly help sort it out with the director, or take it myself. But it darn well better be a proposal or specific complaint - not just a grudge or vague gripe, like most of them mentioned here.
If a member chooses not to pursue their ideas, and doesn't ask their director to take it up, that's not a problem that PAMPA elections can solve.
Brett
Hey you guys...I second Ron's thoughts. Whenever there are two or more people, there are at least two or more variations on the ideas being discussed.
One sport flyer's perspecitve.
I would suggest that what Brodak has done to benefit Brodak has, only as a by-product, benefitted PAMPA. I can also tell you that I've witnessed the not quite invisible contempt that contest flyers seem to have towards sport flyers. I've also learned to live with it and take advantage of the contest flyer's expertise when I can. And low and behold, I've added a tid bit here and there to the knowledge base of a contest flyer here and there.
PAMPA is not a sport flyer's organization nor "the" vehicle to be used to promote sport flying. Just think of what we sport flyers we lose, if it were to become that.
John Ramsey
Craig Beskow
Craig,
Thanks for your reminder.
I made the penultimate internet mistake of writing things while angry and pushing the send button to make myself feel better. Usually best to wait 24 hours before doing so!
While I have not changed my mind about who would best provide the leadership required for PAMPA to fulfill its charge, I agree that the manner in which I expressed myself didn't exactly enhance my image or credibility. I have chosen to remove and/or edit my inputs so as to lessen the negativity contained therein without eliminating what I continue to feel are valid reasons that PAMPA as it is currently incorporated would be better served by a Keith Trostle presidency.
I reiterate my previous statement of respect for John Brodak and all he has accomplished at Brodak Models. Nonetheless, his vision of the future of our organization is not one I can embrace.
To any who were offended by my choice of words in those messages, I do apologize. Do not, however, discard the legitimacy of my points without serious consideration.
Thanks again, Craig.
Ted Fancher
Craig Beskow
Beware of "broadening the horizons" of PAMPA because as you approach a "one size fits all" mentality you will probably lose the highly-interested folks that make things happen.
Expanding into other areas would also be detrimental to the other SIGs.
Linking Brodak's annual event to PAMPA is not fair. Remember that combat, carrier, sport, scale, etc. are also flown at Brodak's. I think John's excellent efforts are toward promoting ALL forms of CL.
I believe both candidates are outstanding people and I like ALL forms of modeling (and all forms of CL). Since PAMPA is a Precision Aerobatics SIG however, my vote will have to go to Keith to keep it on track.
George
Craig Beskow
Well now Ted has accused John of telling his wife to cook the books, but Brett thought that went to far and did an apology for the overstep. Maybe we need to check ourselves here when debating malfeasance. I'm new to this group but it takes only a cursory look to know that John's not alone in his supposed conflict of interest (perhaps also fairly called a syncrenicity). Other officers in PAMPA sell model airplane stuff. (Really great model airplane stuff for cheap.) The host of our forum does some bis also, right, including selling my gosh his own modified engines and BRODAK products. Can we get beyond this.
The way I see it much of this debate is a function of PAMPA's success. The appeal of the mag, the intrinsic appeal of the sport itself, the marvelous models and flying skills, has made stunt popular and interesting to a wider group who cannot and do not compete at a top level. So you have people like me members of PAMPA, fun flyers or sport flyers, learning the pattern and improving building skills, thinking how best to vote and shape the leadership to benefit all concerned. Can we just deal with it without getting huffy. Actually some people are naive enough to think differing points of view and open discussion can be a resource.
Dennis Moritz
Dennis, I wrote my first response directly at you. If there was anything that was going to turn anybody off and fire somebody up, it was your original post along with the heading you used. To wit:
Let's see how many top 20 flyers are there. Uh. Uhhm, uhmm. TWENTY! My PAMPA directory lists about 1850 names (down some I understand from years past) so that leaves 1830 or so who are right, right, let me see, give me a minute, not top twenty(!) they are the other not qualified 1830! Hard one. Who is PAMPA?
Dennis M
And then your heading, which I have also purposely changed.
Dennis, PAMPA has always included everybody, and it nowhere, ever has been just top 20. That was just an inflamatory statement just to get somebody fired up, and then you accuse us of turning people off. There are so many categories and so many people who compete--not only at the Nats, but all over the country. Why PAMPA classes are being used in nearly every regional meet as well as at the Nats. Why would you make such a stupid assertion I do not know other than in an attempt to promote one side of the argument that the "little guy", whom you here define as the 1830 who do not make the top 20, are not at present being included. Why? Don't you think that was a little inflammatory?
And why John, in his campaign letter, would make the fallaciouis assumption of hundreds of thousands of dollars lost because in one year there was a loss of membership I do not know. That statement, alone, will keep me from voting for John. It is either a deliberate lie (and I would hate to accuse John of that), or it comes from somebody who is totally uninformed. PAMPA lost those people's "dues". Those people lost the PAMPA magazine. And PAMPA saved the production costs of those magazines which balanced out. PAMPA lost nothing financially because of this loss of membership.
OK, so PAMPA lost membership (for a variety of reasons) in one year. If you look at John's campaign letter his contest showed a dramatic loss in attendance one year. So? What's the point? Is either at fault? Will either not survive? Does either need a new direction in leadership? John bounced back. PAMPA is doing fine and will continue to do so while traveling in its present direction.
What I have been trying to say is your membership gives you a vote, but the dues you pay give you a magazine. If anyone were to say, "I pay my dues and don't get a vote" that, too, is malarky. And if people don't want to pay the price, they don't have to. Maybe PAMPA ought to do like the AMA and lower the price of membership by Five dollars if you choose not to get the magazine. Try to get the magazine from AMA for the same price they reduce your dues if you choose not to get the magazine. Suddenly the cost goes up. And they have much higher revinues from advertising.
Leonard Neumann
Dennis,
Your point is valid and I apologize for contributing to the need for you to post it.
My only defense is that everything I posted (and edited) was a reaction to what I felt was an unwarranted example of precisely the sort of thing to which you take exception. That example was John's campaign mailing.
When one is as close to the reins as I've been for the last decade or two you know how hard the horses work. To once again be reminded of the willingness of others to disparage the sweat expended on behalf of the organization has a tendency to raise the blood pressure.
I will try hard not to be the reason for you to have to write another note like this.
Ted
Incorrect - Ted said no such thing, nor did such a thing happen. There was a honest dispute over an accounting definition, that made a difference in the profit statement but did not at any point involve or even suggest any misappropriation of funds, or anything that suggested any sort of malfeasance. At no time did any money improperly move from one account to another.
When I heard the situation (both sides), I did find John's intepretation mind-boggling given his successful business experience, but It was resolved correctly using accepted definitions in the way that the Secretary/Treasurer (Shareen), and other interested parties (Frank, and accounting consultants) found acceptable. That's their job.
People of good will can have disputes, and they can be resolved.
I therefore did not see a need to apologize since there is was no accusation. I did see the need to make the issue crystal -clear because I know there are three or four people running back and misrepresenting (or at least interpreting in the worst imaginable way) the situation to John and their buddies, even as we speak, in order to further inflame the situation because it suits their political purposes. Seen it a dozen times over the years. I prefer to think that your post (i.e., "turning the enemy against themselves" ) is not a manifestion of this.
Ted, having been the recipient of the amazing amounts of venom for having the temerity to act as PAMPA president for a time, is pretty passionate about this stuff, as are most of us. I hate to see such an important decision made based on FUD, and I'm sure that he does, too. There's only so much of this nonsense that a person can put up with before he has to say something to correct it.
It's not that easy to have a calm discussion of the issues in public when you are getting private hate mail from the people you are debating. Given the situation, I think that everyone is showing a remarkable restraint. What you chose to characterize as "diatribes" hardly exceed the noise level of the continual drum beat of nasty-grams and vaguely threatening hate mail.
There are valid points of dispute (i.e. accounting practices, suggestions of "lack or representation", hyperbole over membership numbers and effects thereof) that John made into public issues with his letter. A debate of the merits of his campaign statements is a perfectly reasonable topic, in my opinion, and merely having a passionately held differing opinion is certainly acceptable.
You might consider that others, who may not be Brodak supporters, might have a different interpretation of these so-called "diatribes".
Brett
This was exactly the reaction I was trying to convey. I certainly hope no one took my comments to mean one bit more than what you said. I was, and am, very surprised at that interpretation.
Craig Beskow
I do know that a lot of us are frustrated in general with the AMA because it has turned into an RC organization over the years. I have been an AMA member since 1960 and a CD/Leader member since 1980. I remember the anguish when the free flight guys started the NFFS and then had the audacity to run their own NATS. The AMA, right or wrong, has promoted RC over the years and has seen the overall membership grow. Splinter groups, like FF and CL, get the leftovers.
If John wants to set up a Control Line organization to promote CL flying, I think that's a great idea and one that should be pursued. I don't think PAMPA should be changed to become that organization. If it happened, then another PAMPA would have be started by those of us who want a SIG for CLPA.
My two cents.
Ron King
I love to build; I love to fly. The only thing Advanced about me is my age.
Well said and a viable proposition.
Actually, back in the early days of PAMPA just such an attempt ws made by Doc Laird Jackson. Unfortunately, the concept died due to lack of interest. Perhaps it is time to retest the idea and, if that is John's desire, he would be a good person to initiate it.
As you note, however, PAMPA is not the vehicle to do so.
Ted
How did you come to this conclusion? Sport fliers get a magazine largely related to sport flying and casual competition. That's also where the vast majority of the money goes. How does this translate to "second-class citizen"?
How many policy changes have you proposed to the EC? Any?
I really, really genuinely want to know *exactly how PAMPA does not serve it's members*- all members. I've asked various people in all sorts of ways, but so far no one has been even willing to take a shot at explaining it. It's not a assault, but a request for information.
Nobody can solve a problem that you can't even define!
Brett
>Nobody can solve a problem that you can't even define!
Not a problem but a subtle attitude. I just got
the feeling that if you weren't an active competitor,
you didn't fully fit in. Maybe it's just me, but I
don't think this thread would have started if there
weren't others who felt likewise.
For instance, the club I *used* to belong to
(which shall remain unnamed) was very heavily
competition oriented, when I would say I
wasn't really interested in that, I kinda
got the impression I was some sort of heretic.
I'm dropping it and going off to "discuss"
27CRF55.141 with Jerry Irvine
Well, Ed, thank you for joining Fubar and Floyd C in your contributions to this forum by asking questions, making comments, letting people respond to them, and then deleting yourself as if it never happened while the others are left hanging in space. Do I have to kill the edit button entirely and make everyone go through me before they delete?
Leonard Neumann
Please remove/revoke my registration for this forum.
Yes, you did.
>I did not physically delete the posting.
You can't. Only I have that privilege.
>Even Ted & Jim T. did that on a couple of posts in this
>thread.
They deleted or edited something to which there was no response. They did not dangle the worm in front of somebody, let them nibble at it, and then jerk it out of their mouth. They also did not go out of their way to delete EVERY comment they had made on the subject to tear up all of the threads.
>Please remove/revoke my registration for this forum.
It is active if you want to come back. It is your decision, just as being or not being a member of PAMPA, AMA, or the NRA. (I probably shouldn't have grouped them together.)
Just remember, Ed, a forum is here to exchange views. Sometimes there are erroneous views. But the start of this thread contained some very inflamatory accusations or inuendos, and certainly drew some very erroneous conclusions. I felt then, as I do now, that it had to be answered. And I answered rather than deleting.
Leonard Neumann
"....It is your decision, just as being or not being a member of PAMPA, AMA, or the NRA. (I probably shouldn't have grouped them together.)...."
=========================
Hi, Dad,
I have no objection whatever to your grouping the three organizations! There are quite a few of the readers of this forum who are or have been members of all three organizations. Some of us have even held memberships in the three simultaneously. We don't find them to be in conflict or mutually exclusive whatsoever.
Quite frankly, the issues confronted by the latter have the potential to affect our lives a great deal more than those confronted by the former two.....Constitutional rights vs. pursuit of happiness, etc.
Paul
The Old Sourdough
Ruksakinmakiak, Alaska, US of A
I belong to all three. The NRA is far & away the most important of the bunch.
/\/\/
Wow...
The City Smasher
PAMPA, as an organization, can only deliver "product", for lack of a better word. I certainly don't think I have seen the attitude to any great extent, but we are all different, so I don't deny that there might be some of it. But I would guess its a local attitude, and it's certainly not a concious plan or policy of the organization.
>I'm dropping it and going off to "discuss"
>27CRF55.141 with Jerry Irvine
Oh dear Lord, has it really gotten that bad? Mr. Jerry "Where's my T-Shirt" Irvine? Ay Carumba!
Brett
OOOOOOooo!!!! 
(What exactly is 27CRF55? I haven't been keeping up.)
(Code of Federal Regulations)
(Title 27, Volume 1)
(Revised as of April 1, 2002)
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
(CITE: 27CFR55.141)
TITLE 27--ALCOHOL, TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND FIREARMS
CHAPTER I--BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
PART 55--COMMERCE IN EXPLOSIVES--Table of Contents
Subpart H--Exemptions
Sec. 55.141 Exemptions.
(a) General. Except for the provisions of Secs. 55.180 and 55.181,
this part does not apply to:
(1) Any aspect of the transportation of explosive materials via
railroad, water, highway, or air which is regulated by the U.S.
Department of Transportation and its agencies, and which pertains to
safety.
(2) The use of explosive materials in medicines and medicinal agents
in the forms prescribed by the official United States Pharmacopeia or
the National Formulary. ``The United States Pharmacopeia and The
National Formulary,'' USP and NF Compendia, are available from the
United States Pharmacopeial Convention, Inc., 12601 Twinbrook Parkway,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.
(3) The transportation, shipment, receipt, or importation of
explosive materials for delivery to any agency of the United States or
to any State or its political subdivision.
(4) Small arms ammunition and components of small arms ammunition.
(5) The manufacture under the regulation of the military department
of
the United States of explosive materials for, or their distribution to
or storage or possession by, the military or naval services or other
agencies of the United States.
(6) Arsenals, navy yards, depots, or other establishments owned by,
or operated by or on behalf of, the United States.
(7) The importation, distribution, and storage of fireworks
classified as UN0336, UN0337, UN0431, or UN0432 explosives by the U.S.
Department of Transportation at 49 CFR 172.101 and generally known as
``consumer fireworks'' or ``articles pyrotechnic.''
(8) Gasoline, fertilizers, propellant actuated devices, or
propellant actuated industrial tools manufactured, imported, or
distributed for their intended purposes.
(9) Industrial and laboratory chemicals which are intended for use
as reagents and which are packaged and shipped pursuant to U.S.
Department of Transportation regulations, 49 CFR Parts 100 to 177, which
do not require explosives hazard warning labels.
(b) Black powder. Except for the provisions applicable to persons
required to be licensed under subpart D, this part does not apply with
respect to commercially manufactured black powder in quantities not to
exceed 50 pounds, percussion caps, safety and pyrotechnic fuses, quills,
quick and slow matches, and friction primers, if the black powder is
intended to be used solely for sporting, recreational, or cultural
purposes in antique firearms, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(16) or
antique devices, as exempted from the term ``destructive devices'' in 18
U.S.C. 921(a)(4).
Ed;
I must admit, I don't get your point. How are sport flyers treated as second class citizens? If the PAMPA SN editor takes the time to include sport flying columns in SN, does that make us "just tolerated?" I don't think so.
PAMPA's focus is "to promote and improve the Control Line Precision Aerobatics event" as stated in paragraph 1 of the bylaws. So, does sport flying contradict that? I do not believe so. Would something like speed, combat, racing, or scale contradict that? Yes. These are decidedly different and very focused disciplines. To focus on them would run contradictory to Paragraph 1 of the bylaws.
Most of the sport flyers that I have seen fly ships that are capable of doing aerobatic maneuvers - the vast majority of those planes can complete the AMA stunt pattern. Some sport flyers migrate over to competition, some migrate from competition to be sport flyers. I believe PAMPA as a whole understands and supports sport flyers very nicely. Quite frankly, sport flyers don't need much support.
I hate to see any member of PAMPA leave. I would really hate to see someone leave because they got emotional over the definition of sport flyers. PAMPA is our organization and has proven to be supportive of sport flyers. The amount of bandwidth sport flyers get in SN is proof of that. And, I will bet that our esteemed editor of SN would love to get more sport flyer articles if he could find people who would take the time to write them.
Regards - Bob Kruger
1. No organization devoted to amateur enjoyment in any competitive, or even non-competitive, environment should be so foolish as to allow a vendor of goods which are used in said environment to serve as president. The potential for inappropriate behaviour is simply too great. Even the appearance of any conflict of interest(s) must be avoided.
2. In reading Mr. Brodak's position paper I was continuously struck by the thought that he has been in a position to "do something" about these supposed problems. And yet has not, at least not to my knowledge. And I suppose this would be known to me, having been part of the unresponsive, uncommunicative and totally isolated Executive Council (EC) for the past few years as District 11 Dictator.
Looked at with a very slight squint, John has thoroughly and mercilessly criticized his own performance as a member of the EC. That's fine, but when the rifle shot turns into blast from a shotgun, tagging overtly communicative, proactive people like myself, Brett Buck and others... Well, I am simply not very impressed.
Mr. Keith Trostle has my full and unconditional support. I hope you vote for him today.
Thanks for reading,
Dan Rutherford
I'm not weighing in on any of this really, but I suggest given some past nastiness and the involvement of Federal authorities we avoid firearm references. Just a suggestion.
Might I suggest, "slingshot" and perhaps, "trebuchet".
Alan 
Mary's Husband
>1. No organization devoted to amateur enjoyment in any competitive,
>or even non-competitive, environment should be so foolish as to
>allow a vendor of goods which are used in said environment to serve
>as president.
Dave Brown, president of the AMA, also owns Dave Brown
Products. I've bought his wheels & pushrods.
Just an observation.
With your observation you have proven my point. My statement stands; there should be no exceptions to the rule.
Dan Rutherford
Regards,
John Jolley
It seems to me that the Sport Flier is pretty well happy with PAMPA. I put myself in that group. My goal, at 58, is to get to where I can fly the pattern in a few contests when I want to, and not crash. We join for what we can get out of a truly exceptional CL magazine. Sport flying is closer to PA flying than any other type of CL activity, don't you know. What sport flier doesn't try to do a few loops and 8's? The powertrain is similar...easy to use, quiet, reasonably cheap and reliable. The airplanes are beautiful and there are so many different designs that it isn't difficult to find one that both flies good and suits the builder's skills.
One thing that I would like to say, and this is based on 15 years of competetive F1A Free Flight flying, and before that, 17 years of CL Competition. IN GENERAL: You generally CANNOT base a club or a SIG on Sport Fliers. IN GENERAL: They don't run for office, they don't hold CD licenses, they whine about having to join AMA to join your Chartered club, they join this year and are MIA for a few years, then come back, etc. The Competitors are the ones that drive the clubs, the contests, and the SIGs. IMHO, the Sport Fliers will NEVER have their own SIG, and if they want to tag along with PAMPA, that's fine. If they don't have suggestions as to what PAMPA can do for them, they shouldn't expect a lot of attention. All they would have to do is speak up and get involved a little. It's not all that bad! I think STUNT NEWS does quite a decent job for the CL Sport Fliers, and most of them are quite happy with that. 
Steve
I believe it was you who sent me a private message over SSW the other day and it got inadvertently erased along with some old messages. If it was important you might want to send it again.
Thanks.
Ted
As an aside, I think the main reason PAMPA (and Stunt) can support such a big newsletter is that there is so much more to say about Stunt than there is about Combat. Just take the issue of covering and finishing alone.
We have two very good canidates running for the top spot in PAMPA.
We also have two very different philosophies of the direction PAMPA should be taking. We have John Brodaks and we have the top 180.
I assume this means that Brodak has a philosophy that supports the entire PAMPA membership if not the entire control line community while the other candidate is only interested in "the top 180". I would like to know where you get the impression or the right to state or even suggest that the other candidate “Keith” has a very limited scope or intent of whom PAMPA should serve.
I would also suggest that you read thread 6001 “Since everyone’s gotten Johns campaign statement”. It might help you to understand what Keith wants to do for PAMPA
Flying Control Line is not a Hobby it's a way of Life.
Be Safe.
Larry Foster
Larry,
Read the entire post again and you might understand my snide remark about the 180. That is my uneducated guess on how many truely competitive PAMPA members there are, the rest of the 1700 or so are basically sport fliers. This would of course put Keith in the 180 group of die hard old guard PAMPA members. I have nothing against the old guard that so vigourosly defend the current direction of PAMPA. It's their SIG and that's what they've said in so many words.
There are a few that are less than pleasent to deal with, but they will deal with you. I have also enjoyed Stunt News and think it's a good mag and while there are more articles for the sport flier than any other publication I find most of the rest a bore and of no benifit to me. Everyone envolved does a great job that suggests that it is a highly professional magazine which is all the more impressive considering it is all done by volunteers.
As I stated in Ted's thread on being flabbergasted, I've become convinced that PAMPA is not for me. I will not renew my membership regardless of whoever is to be the next president. I know, big deal. I would like to continue to get the mag though. Is that possible?
Frankly I'm pretty sick of all of this, no one is really listening to what Brodak is saying and it's not the demise of competitive CLPA as some seem to think. He is fresh blood with maybe some new ideas about growth and publicity. Keith is a good man who is honest, intelligent but part of the old guard, I never meant anyone to think I thought he was evil, corrupt, or bad for PAMPA. Wish I could say the same for what some have said about J. Brodak.
regards,
Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
> Frank took over at a time when we almost cancelled the
>team trials because someone threatened to shoot the chief
>judge.
WHAT!!!????
Good grief. I thought some of the rivalries and nastiness in Combat were pretty bad, but I've NEVER heard of things getting THIS bad.
Iskandar,
As you have in the past shown a tendency to make far-reaching assumptions based upon too little knowledge, my advice to you is not to run too far with this issue. The guy making the threat was and is a whack job. So is his "buddy." The former was identified, told to find a new place to play. Not so sure about the latter, merely because I don't care to know.
Bottom Line: Neither of these two characters are representative of PAMPA membership at large, whether top-level competitor or casual sport flier.
If you want ugly, ask around about F2D competition back in the days of the U.S.S.R. when the only way to get out of Dodge, see and enjoy free societies in operation was to make the W/C team.
Dan Rutherford
Dan, there are better ways of sharing information than this. You come across as snooty and condescending, as I'm sure many here have told you in the past. Did you ever read my reply about the Honda CVCC, by the way? It was definitely around when the catalytic converters came along in 1975.
> my
>advice to you is not to run too far with this issue.
Not planning to, sorry. But it was pretty jarring to read what Brett wrote. So forgive my interest in the issue. I am glad to hear it has been resolved. If it's meant to be a PAMPA Secret, then it shouldn't have been brought out in a public forum in the first place.
>Bottom Line: Neither of these two characters are
>representative of PAMPA membership at large, whether
>top-level competitor or casual sport flier.
I never said anything of the sort. Do you mean to imply that I was implying that PAMPA members were like this in general?
>If you want ugly, ask around about F2D competition back in
>the days of the U.S.S.R. when the only way to get out of
>Dodge, see and enjoy free societies in operation was to make
>the W/C team.
No need to go that far. The thing that saddens me most is that a lot of these guys who were going at each other are really good friends of mine (or were.. some are deceased).
(I'm pretty sure Dan's not going to read this, or reply to it.. )
That is obvioiusly an "uneducated" guess, Rick, considering that is approximately how many show up at the Nats each year (counting judges, officials, and all).
There are (my own uneducated guess) at least ten times, maybe twenty times, maybe forty times (hey, this is an uneducated guess, right?) as many PAMPA members who do not show up at the Nats, each year, but who are still involved in competition flying in regional meets throughout the year. And then there are people who come every other year, or whatever, or who show up for the first time.
You have to realize that the VAST majority of the competition membership does not go to the Nats due to travel, costs, timing (gotta get off of work), etc.
Hey, I wish you guys would quit throwing these darts around like as if it is "old guard" (obvioiusly negative to us newbies who have all the bright ideas) verses "the rest of us."
>This would of
>course put Keith in the 180 group of die hard old guard
>PAMPA members. I have nothing against the old guard that so
>vigourosly defend the current direction of PAMPA. It's their
>SIG and that's what they've said in so many words.
It is a Special Interest Group founded to oversee competition events within AMA. Why are you so beligerent against that thought? Why do you hate the purpose for which it was founded? What do you have against it?
If you joined the NRA and then said you wanted to change it into an anti gun group, don't you think there might not be just a little opposition from the "old guard" as you call them? This is a competition oriented organization. Changing its purpose or direction negates that purpose or direction.
As you have already said, you don't have to be a member of PAMPA. It was your choice to join and if you find nothing here of value or that you wish to support, then you are certainly free to leave again.
>There are a few that are less than pleasent to deal with,
>but they will deal with you. I have also enjoyed Stunt News
>and think it's a good mag and while there are more articles
>for the sport flier than any other publication I find most
>of the rest a bore and of no benifit to me.
You have already said you don't care about competition, right? Well, there is going to be a "little" of that in there, don't you think? I find stuff in there that I don't read. Everyone does (well, a lot of people, anyway). Pick up Model Aviation some time and see if you don't maybe find a lot of content there that is a bore and of no benefit to the sport control line flyer.
>Everyone envolved (involved?) does a great job that
>suggests that it is a highly professional magazine
>which is all the more impressive considering it is
>all done by volunteers.
>
>As I stated in Ted's thread on being flabbergasted, I've
>become convinced that PAMPA is not for me. I will not renew
>my membership regardless of whoever is to be the next
>president. I know, big deal. I would like to continue to get
>the mag though. Is that possible?
Sure, I would think that could be arranged. Just pay the membership fees but state that you don't want your name on the roster of members. Remember, your fees go to pay the cost of the printing and the mailing of the magazine.
Why do people get the feeling that the magazine costs a dime and the rest of the dues go to pad the pockets of the organization? (See John Brodak's statement of the hundreds of thousands of dollars being lost because of a decline in membership.)
>Frankly I'm pretty sick of all of this, no one is really
>listening to what Brodak is saying and it's not the demise
>of competitive CLPA as some seem to think. He is fresh blood
>with maybe some new ideas about growth and publicity. Keith
>is a good man who is honest, intelligent but part of the old
>guard, I never meant anyone to think I thought he was evil,
>corrupt, or bad for PAMPA. Wish I could say the same for
>what some have said about J. Brodak.
>
>regards,
>Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
Rick, I join you in thinking we have beaten a dead horse. But I think it is you and others who are not really listening to the premise of the argument.
I, along with you and, I would think, everyone else who has spoken to the issue, truly admire John Brodak. I admire him as a man, as a businessman, and as a member of the hobby that we enjoy. But, frankly, I have listened to what he wrote, and, if he actually wrote that letter that was mailed out to the membership, then I have to conclude that he doesn't have the vaguest idea of what the President of PAMPA does, how the organization is constituted to operate, or where the money goes that is paid as dues. It was a campaign statement, not unlike what all of the presidential hopefuls are going through or the wannabe governors of California. They hand yhou a "wish list" and they say they have a "plan" (but they really haven't the vaguest idea what to do if they really get there.)
No, it won't be the demise of the "competitive CLPA" (?) as you state if John gets in. There is a constitution and a board of directors who will see that it continues to operate in the way that it was intended.
However, t reminds me of another of our members making the statement earlier (perhaps in jest) that he would like to throw his hat into the ring to be president of PAMPA, and then adding, "What does the president do, anyway?" I would think you would find that out first, before you say "I want to be president so that I can do..."
Leonard Neumann
Also - I have a flight box full of "cottage industry" products many of which are manufactured/sold by modelers in the upper reaches of PAMPA.
Trust the voters to make a choice. How could you not believe that Mr. B. would not work hard and learn everything about the post. The man is a workaholic who loves our hobby. Good grief, it's an election, not a coup.
Alan
Mary's Husband
Apparently he was "talked into" running for president. He, himself, had made a public statement that he was asked, but was not going to run, but then finally relented. It may even be that John's "vision" was given to him by someone else. Maybe that is where some of these errors came into his campaign statement.
Be that as it may, it appears to me that this whole thing has degenerated into a vision of what individual people want for the control line community, and some have lost sight of the fact that we are talking about president of PAMPA, not "Sportflyers Anonymous".
Leonard Neumann
It sonds to me as if Mr. Brodak may have been reluctantly accepted a draft put forward by the notorious "East Coast Stunt Cabal" I've heard so much about.
Paul
The Old Sourdough
Ruksakinmakiak, Alaska, US of A
I believe my guess is much closer to the truth than yours.
You're being ridiculous and somewhat condesending, thats real nice preach . Hey if you're not at the NATS, you're not serious, plain and simple.
>You have to realize that the VAST majority of the
>competition membership does not go to the Nats due to
>travel, costs, timing (gotta get off of work), etc.
I have to realize??? No you have to wake up. The vast majority of PAMPA membership is first and foremost sport/fun and second competition. Try this, get all the Stunt News issues for the past year, then look at all the listed competitions and read the names. You'll see the same names Leonard and there is no more than 180 (200 tops) of them. These are the people that are, and border on, the serious competitor. The ones that PAMPA was founded for.
>Hey, I wish you guys would quit throwing these darts around
>like as if it is "old guard" (obvioiusly negative to us
>newbies who have all the bright ideas) verses "the rest of
>us."
I'm sorry you don't like the term "old guard" it is approriate.
It's the term I use to describe anyone who constantly resists any kind of change and sees the same as some kind of threat. A little over a year ago I started a thread on CL ARF's for intermediate pilots. If I remember correctly you were one of the old guard that said it would never happen. To costly, no one would buy them, no major company will waste the time, and they wouldn't be of very good quality. That's what the old guard had to say about such nonsense and that is the type of attitude most members see coming from some of the leaders of PAMPA. I'm sure Dirtydan would not classify himself as a leader of PAMPA I think he is and at least he had the kahones (sp) to admit he was wrong about the idea of CL ARF's not a word from anyone else.
>It is a Special Interest Group founded to oversee
>competition events within AMA. Why are you so beligerent <---(sp)
>against that thought? Why do you hate the purpose for which
>it was founded? What do you have against it?
Trust me Leonard if I ever get belligerent I make it worth my time.
I have never, ever said I hated the purpose for which PAMPA was founded I said I didn't see why PAMPA couldn't BE MORE. I was wrong, there are to many sticks in the mud that don't listen.
>If you joined the NRA and then said you wanted to change it
>into an anti gun group, don't you think there might not be
>just a little opposition from the "old guard" as you call
>them? This is a competition oriented organization.
>Changing its purpose or direction negates that purpose or
>direction.
If I joined the NRA I would have to knock my front teeth out, move into a trailer house, marry my sister, start watching NASCAR and have the size of my manhood reduced in size. How's that for belligerent.
I'm not joining the NRA and trying to change it into something more christian, I was talking about adding to the mission statement of a model airplane organization.
>You have already said you don't care about competition,
>right?
Really? When did I say that?
I DIDN'T!
EVER!
YOU"RE NOT LISTENING!
>Well, there is going to be a "little" of that in
>there, don't you think? I find stuff in there that I don't
>read. Everyone does (well, a lot of people, anyway). Pick
>up Model Aviation some time and see if you don't maybe find
>a lot of content there that is a bore and of no benefit to
>the sport control line flyer.
I was simply making a statement about SN Len, not giving a critique.
>>Everyone envolved (involved?)
Refer to comments below
>Why do people get the feeling that the magazine costs a dime
>and the rest of the dues go to pad the pockets of the
>organization? (See John Brodak's statement of the hundreds
>of thousands of dollars being lost because of a decline in
>membership.)
I read the statement over and I'm still trying to find where it states that the magazine cost a dime and the secret kabal is lining it's pockets.
> But, frankly, I have listened to what he
>wrote,
Since you chose to point out my mispelling let me ask you...
how does one "listen" to what someone writes.
>and, if he actually wrote that letter that was mailed
>out to the membership, then I have to conclude that he
>doesn't have the vaguest idea of what the President of PAMPA
>does, how the organization is constituted to operate, or
>where the money goes that is paid as dues. It was a
>campaign statement, not unlike what all of the presidential
>hopefuls are going through or the wannabe governors of
>California.
>They hand yhou <---(do you mean YOU here?)
>a "wish list" and they say they
>have a "plan" (but they really haven't the vaguest idea what
>to do if they really get there.)
So John Brodak doesn't have the vaguest idea of what to do?
This is the insinuation you just made.
Or am I not listening to what you wrote? (sarcasim not belligerence)
>
>No, it won't be the demise of the "competitive CLPA" (?) as
>you state if John gets in. There is a constitution and a
>board of directors who will see that it continues to operate
>in the way that it was intended.
Don't you mean an outdated tired mission statement and the Old Guard will insure it continues to operate in the way it was intended?
>However, t reminds me of another of our members making the
>statement earlier (perhaps in jest) that he would like to
>throw his hat into the ring to be president of PAMPA, and
>then adding, "What does the president do, anyway?" I would
>think you would find that out first, before you say "I want
>to be president so that I can do..."
Like I posted earlier I couldn't care less anymore who the pres is.
regards,
Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
Calm down! go to Gotta Admit, I'm flabbergasted thread and see my post.
John (the only member of PAMPA in Pampa) Ashford 
. Hey if your're not at the NATS, you're I, too, think we need to calm down, and I am going to respond to only one statement. The number of people throughout the US who are involved in competition (the reason for which PAMPA was formed) You will not see all the contest results in Stunt News, so don't go by that. Often you will only see placings, so don't go by that.
But, at the Nats we have (about) 40 contestants in Open, (about) 40 (less this year) in Advanced, plus Intermediate, plus Beginner. These are all separate categories, no overlaps (except for the winner of Intermediate gets to enter Advanced). There are the Junior and Senior entries (who may enter Advanced) There are the Old Time and Classic entries (some of whom will enter other events) plus judges, officials, etc. who took time out for other duties and will not be flying. That's a lot of people.
But there are at least ten times, maybe twenty times (no exageraton) as many fliers who participate in competition events throughout the country during the year as who actually go to the Nats. We live in the Muncie area and run into far more at regional meets who do not enter the Nats than who do. And the farther away you get, the fewer you will find who will make the trip.
This is not exaggeration, Rick. This is fact. There are a lot more people out there than you realize who enjoy competition events--and who enjoy it. That doesn't mean that they don't fly for sport either, whatever that means. Matt burns about 30 gallons of fuel a year, and maybe only one gallon of it is burned in actual competition.
Enough of this.
Leonard Neumann
2 hours sleep in the last 48 isn't good for someone like me.
Len you are a good man.
regards,
Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
I am sure that any "sport flyer" kind of movement is going to benefit from the strength of all the SIG's associated with C/L. John Brodak has a great idea but PAMPA is the wrong SIG to use for his agenda. He needs to start another one with PAMPA, NASS, the carrier and combat SIG's, etc. at his side for a unified push for the benefit of C/L. John simply has it wrong in his campaign for president of PAMPA, but right in another way. In another organization.
There is no doubt that a NFFS type organization can be worked up and by John Brodak's campaign letter I think he is the one to attempt such an endevour. I'll be one of the first to join.
I am voting for Keith Trostle for the good of PAMPA, as it is a competition organization.
Chris McMillin
Rick, I understand tired. I appreciate all your comments and hope, also, that nothing I wrote is construed as personal, either. I think one of our biggest problems is that we start to polarize and begin to feel it is "us" verses "them". (Hey, I don't' even know who "us" is, so how can I tell "us" apart from "them".)
We are all control liners, and in PAMPA we share the goals of stunt. Maybe at times we talk about the wrong things. Maybe if we spent more time talking about the things we agree on, we would end the day feeling happy (even if we only got two hours of sleep)
Hey, what kept you up all night?
Leonard Neumann
Wish I could say it was something pleasant.
I'm in charge of a refurbishment project for the city of Tulsa.
It involves a converted train bridge over the Arkansas river that is now for pedestrian use, fisherman, bike riders, joggers, blah blah blah
It pays the bills, but it's making me grouchy and cutting into my handle time.
I'm going home to change for my sons football game...then maybe some sleep tonite!
regards,
Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
"If I joined the NRA I would have to knock my front teeth out, move into a trailer house, marry my sister, start watching NASCAR and have the size of my manhood reduced in size. How's that for belligerent?"
========================================================
Rick,
That really is pretty beligerent and very offensive to those of us who are: life members of the NRA, college educated, living in our own non-trailer homes, married to someone other than our sisters, and hate NASCAR. As for the reduced manhood, I can't speak to that. I'm not making any claims one way or the other.
You have some good points, but that kind of statement is not apt to help make any converts among those of us in the great unwashed.
Paul M. Eaton
The Old Sourdough
Ruksakinmakiak, Alaska, US of A
regards,
Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
When I wrote that message, I hadn't yet read what you later wrote to Leonard. I tend to reply to messages as I read them. This may mean that I miss something in a follow up, but those are the breaks.
Apology recognized and accepted in the spirit in which it was tendered.
Paul
The Old Sourdough
Ruksakinmakiak, Alaska, US of A
Rick,
So, exactly what is wrong with the "old guard"? Seems as if they have done an excellent job over the past 30 years with PAMPA in terms of growth, publicity, and remaining true to the PAMPA bylaws which define the "mission" of our organization. If the "new guard" wants to change the "mission" of PAMPA then they should set about changing the bylaws per Article XII of the bylaws, just as any of us can do through our district representatives.
Once again, this is the Precision Aerobatic Model Pilots Association built to further Precision Aerobatics. It seems to me that sport fliers are getting some pretty good benefits from PAMPA as it is. I am happy to have the sport fliers as an integral part of our group, makes life much more interesting and fun.
I am sorry to read that you are disgruntled with a "sour grapes" attitude. I am also sorry to see you leave PAMPA. Although I do not know you personally it seems that you have much to contribute to our sport/hobby.
Bill Byles
Bill: Very well said, I couldn't agree more.
Larry Foster
Flying Control Line is not a Hobby it's a way of Life.
Be Safe.
Larry Foster
Ted, thanks for the apology for a propensity to diatribe that night. And Leonard thanks for letting the peace settle. Yes, I started the string with a calculated goad. I'm guilty, definitely stirred the pot. But I honestly thought there was problem to be looked at. Good to shake hands on all this rancorous discussion. Hope there was some light as well as heat.
I have tried to reduce the sting of what I feel remains to be said. Admittedly, I'm still hot. Here's what I came up with. Also, I want to make it clear that I'm outside all these polotics. I never said more than a few words to John.
I think John Brodak brought control line, along with others, back from the brink. Looking at his resume, I realized how briefly he's been with us pushing the sport along. 1995, the first kits, 1997 a buy out of Perfect Tanks. Before that the shrinkage of necessary and convenient cl items and the difficulty of finding,exciting inexpensive cl kits was signaling an imminent demise. If I had to roll my own tanks or build the last three Flight Streaks from scratch, it would have been a lot slower and difficult for me. Tank problems alone would probably have grounded my work. And the catalogue of kits allows me to muse like a kid again. Heart healthy at my age. RSM, Walter, Tom Morris, Windy, you yourself Leonard with your forum and engines, Richard Oliver, Randy Smith and many, many others (I haven't been back that long, please excuse any over sight, or fellows add the names) produce a cooperative intermesh. We're blessed here big time. Able to play and compete in the present day with a satisfying consuming sport flexible enough to include many different skill levels. All of us know we're engaged in an anachronism. Nothing electronic and contemporary about a bellcrank and wire that wiggles control. But it’s quite a viable anachronism, thank you.
I spoke about a defensive attitude I felt towards John and the sport flyer. Think that was accurate. Meaning people were doing some jousting with ghosts. I doubt that John is an 800 pound gorilla mostly interested in self aggrandizement. (Although it can be argued he dated and married Fay Raye.) I think that’s a figment of some who feel turf threatened. Perhaps in the light of day (we have to stop staying up all night reading and writing on this forum!) it would be clear that John’s vision is not an attack on PAMPA as we know it. Rather an attempt to build a wider audience where the best in sport can strut their stuff. Wouldn’t it be nice if the world class got a stipend. And Tom Morris didn’t toil as an editor without monetary compensation? How about a check for Shareen.
Dennis Moritz
Nothing is wrong with the Old Guard if you like things to reamin the same year after year. Apparently most of the members that post on the forum are perfectly content with PAMPA only doing what PAMPA has done since its creation. I am not.
> If the "new guard" wants to change the
>"mission" of PAMPA then they should set about changing the
>bylaws per Article XII of the bylaws, just as any of us can
>do through our district representatives.
You are absolutely correct! I was thinking that first I'd vote for J. Brodak and he could start the ball rolling.
Now I don't give a ... because even if John gets elected he will be bashing his head against a brick wall.
>Once again, this is the Precision Aerobatic Model Pilots
>Association built to further Precision Aerobatics. It seems
>to me that sport fliers are getting some pretty good
>benefits from PAMPA as it is. I am happy to have the sport
>fliers as an integral part of our group, makes life much
>more interesting and fun.
I never said I wasn't getting allot from PAMPA. I just want more.
I've come to realize that It's not going to happen because the current movers and shakers don't want anything to do with an addition to the PAMPA mission statement. No one that I know that wants more from PAMPA has ever said that they want PAMPA to stop it's control of competitive CLPA, not even J. Brodak, that would be wrong. I can't believe that most of the posts that say that sport fliers want to get rid of PAMPA's role in competition, are not the ones that want more from PAMPA, it is the ones that do not want PAMPA to change. When you want to convince people that something is wrong sometimes things are said to scare people. A change in direction does not mean that you can't continue doing what you have always done.
>I am sorry to read that you are disgruntled with a "sour
>grapes" attitude. I am also sorry to see you leave PAMPA.
>Although I do not know you personally it seems that you have
>much to contribute to our sport/hobby.
Dude there are absolutely no sour grapes here. PAMPA is just not for me, but control line is, and the friendships I have with PAMPA members is definetly something I cherish and will hold on to.
regards,
Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
<http://www.clstunt.com/htdocs/dcforum/DCForumID1/5997.html#17>
btw Ted said he addressed most of what I wanted when he was president but apparently gave up trying.
I'm not depressed Ty, just tired of people not listening.
The things I want have nothing to do with SN they have to do with the focus of PAMPA. I think it should focus on more than competition.
Why?
Because of the size of its membership, talents of the membership, obvious drive of some, and existing infastructure. In that regards I guess SN does have something to do with what I want only in that it is a very good existing communication tool and is also an excellent show piece to other news media.
But, if you and others are satisfied with the staus quo...have fun, I certainly will, and I don't need PAMPA to have fun.
regards,
Rick "catdaddy" Blankenship
But nobody took you seriously on your "wish" list, and I still don't. I don't think you do. It is just something to stir up controversy.
PAMPA doesn't determine the NATS site, AMA does. And the Muncie site was purchased so there would be a dedicated site that they would have for the NATS and other events. It is very expensive, even if alternate sites are avaialble, to move the AMA personnel around for a month of competition plus setting up, tearing down, etc.
Flying fields are not the responsibility of any national organization. It is a club or an individual responsibility. Promotion costs money. Especially radio and TV exposure. People left PAMPA after their "dues" were raised. How much are you willing to raise them for TV exposure? And beer? Tongue-in-cheek. OK. Time for bed. Let's close this down.
Leonard Neumann
Uh, certainly not MY decision, maybe someone else's.
This isn't cash basis or accrual basis accounting. I don't know what it is. Accrual basis would call it income if it were truly sold, even if the payment were not yet received. It would be a receivable. Cash basis wouldn't recognize it until the cash is received. On the shelf, it is INVENTORY in anyone's book! (Well, almost anyone's) In a for-profit organization, you would end up paying tax on non-existent income. Yuk! In a not-for-profit organization, there are certain limits on income to maintain that status. Probably not an issue in this case, but you always want to know where you really stand, and this kind of thing doesn't get you there.
Craig Beskow
I emphasize that *at no time* was or is there even the slightest implication that there was anything really suspicious going on with PAMPA products and Brodak. It was a disagreement over accounting definitions which has since been correctly resolved, nothing more.
The original issue was a minor observation that PAMPA Products revenue had dropped after John took it over and was not considered a significant problem at any time until the "alternate accounting" conflict. I believe that (after significant filtering though his 'advisors') John took offense to this observation and that led to the disagreement over accounting.
I thought, then and now, that the small revenue hit we took was money very well spent for John's overhead costs, and were legitimate and valid charges. John dedicated a lot of space and non-trivial amounts of man-hours of his employees, and built inventory. These were perfectly legitimate. No implication to the contrary was ever intended or implied. There were some inventory decisions I personally would not have thought wise for our type of business, but it's clearly a matter of opinion, and not a real problem.
All of these fixed income sources (PAMPA Products, SN Advertising, etc.) and fixed/ovherhead costs for that matter, are a pretty small fraction of the total cash flow. The vast, vast majority of the money is from member dues and goes right back out as magazine costs. The rest is a drop in the bucket, and I think that's exactly the way it should be. This is all obvious from the PAMPA budget that Shareen publishes each year. We operate with absolutely miniscule operating reserve, and in fact, this year may be the first year that we haven't been counting on renewals for next year to pay the bills for the last two issues. This is the result of the dues increase - and once again, membership numbers almost cancel out on both sides of the equation.
There were a few other finanicial, business, and accounting arrangements that were less than optimal at the time. These have been cleaned up by Shareen and Tom Morris, and we are in very sound shape as far as accounting goes at this time.
Brett