![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In the military, for FUN events, commonly the LEAST qualified person was
selected to run the event. For a dining in or post-deployment party, the personnel officer would find the NEWEST, least experienced lieutenant to run the thing. This provided much hilarity, and a lot of originality to the events. So (and I'm NOT suggesting this), these contest committees positions could be offered to the LEAST qualified peole first. In other words, if you meet the minimum qualifications, you are offered the job first, and if you decline, the next minimally qualified person is offered the position, and so on. Not a good idea for the whole committee (remember, some hysterisis is good), but perhaps an excellent idea for the "newbie" position. Keep in mind that whole divisions of companies are fired sometimes just based on their becoming stale and too resistant to change. They are then replaced with the freshest, minimally qualified replacements. A lot of times the outgoers are surprised by the "young" replacements. In their ignorance, they fail to realise it is the young mind, not the young age that prevails. Eric Greenwell wrote: Papa3 wrote: The current IGC is made up of pilots who have accepted the badge system and earned their badges. It's more likely they'll continue to advocate this sytem than if the IGC was made up of pilots who think the badge system is frustrating and therefore didn't get their badges. Of course this second group can't be IGC members. Sort of circular, isn't it? Built in hysterisis. Not entirely all bad, since some stability is good, but we should be aware of it and help change along a bit for the sake of the underrespresented pilots new to the sport... Mark, Truly one of the most temperate and articulate posts on this subject in a long time. Power to the people! I also agree with Mark's remarks. This situation, where the people pleased with the current system are willing to work for the system, tends to perpetuate the system. When I was an SSA director in the 80's, I wanted the contest rules to "foster and promote" soaring, which meant serving a larger purpose than just making the current contest pilots happy. It was a hard sell philosophically, because many people truly believe what is good for contests is good for the sport. It was also a problem practically, for how do you get people that _might_ be interested in contests to serve on the rules committee? So, along Mark's line, maybe the SSA contest committee (and the similar committee for the IGC), should have a "promotion/novice/etc" oriented person to get the "entry level" pilot represented. -- Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA -- ------------+ Mark Boyd Avenal, California, USA |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Amateur Review of the Garmin GPSMAP 296 GPS | Rhett | Piloting | 10 | March 23rd 05 01:16 AM |
Pirep: Garmin GPSMAP 296 versus 295. (very long) | Jon Woellhaf | Piloting | 12 | September 4th 04 11:55 PM |
Where does Class A start (was IGC Rejects Garmin GPS) | Bruce Hoult | Soaring | 0 | August 1st 04 09:55 AM |
Amateur Review of the Garmin GPSMAP 296 GPS | Rhett | Products | 10 | April 29th 04 06:57 AM |
Garmin 90 Database Updates Discontinued | Val Christian | Piloting | 14 | August 20th 03 09:32 PM |