On Sunday, October 15, 2017 at 1:54:27 PM UTC-4, Tom Kelley #711 wrote:
On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 1:53:22 PM UTC-6, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 11:02:30 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
90,

I see three systemic and troubling issues with the SSA US rules system (opinion poll, RC, etc.). We have discussed these offline, and you made some strong points. Nonetheless, the current system is quite flawed (biased) if you are not part of the SSA good old boys, anti-FAI, groupthink. You made another great point that this bias is natural and difficult to purge (and bias systems do not want to be exterminated). That is the heart of the issue.


Sean,

Personal comments notwithstanding, you are more than welcome to post point-by-point perspectives on any specific differences between US and FAI rules that you feel strongly about. Your fellow pilots would probably appreciate a thoughtful analysis backed up by data and experience. On the other hand, sweeping accusations about bias and conspiracy theories about "deep-state" smoke-filled rooms at SSA headquarters don't particularly advance any useful agenda or illuminate anyone's thinking - though I know some of your fellow pilots get a chuckle out of reading them.

I personally supported adding questions about FAI rules to this year's survey, not because US racing pilots (aside from you) have been clamoring for a change (they haven't), but because I felt it was worth having a discussion on the subject and getting real input. I have no particular interest in preserving the US rules as an independent structure, nor do I have a personal agenda to do away with US rules. My agenda is, first, to ensure safe and fair contest flying in the US; second, increase the participation in and enjoyment of sailplane racing in the US; and third, improve the skill and competitiveness of US racing pilots. Sean Fidler's personal agenda items don't get much attention unless they fit into one of those three.

As is always the case with questions about rules, there needs to some care taken to ensure that respondents are able to provide informed feedback. Otherwise, poll questions (as we have learned from experience) give very poor guidance as to what pilots really want, let alone how to go about it. The idea of doing a line-by-line comparison of each area of rules and a deep description of how each affects individual and group behavior and results under various scenarios, is something relatively few people are willing to endure (as evidenced by the numbers of people lining up to serve on the RC - not many).

We made an attempt over half a dozen iterations to give some flavor of the qualitative differences rule systems create in the racing experience so that pilots would be at least somewhat informed before giving input. There is no perfect way to do that - convert tens of hours of comparison and analysis into something where people can read a digestible about of material and click a response. Speaking personally, my goal was to inform not persuade respondents as I have no particular agenda one way or the other, but I do take this responsibility as one that needs sober guidance and decision-making.

Looking forward to reading you topic-by-topic analysis.

Andy Blackburn
9B

The debate has started! https://seanfidler.com/2017/10/inher...n-poll-part-1/

Best. Tom #711.

I agree with Sean. Why can't the poll just ask a simple question without the highly subjective "education" included in the question? I wrote about this long time ago. The same type of questions with "appropriate education" was used for many years to delay creation of the club class.

Andrzej