Closing the thread?

[raceright]

If you were looking for the same thread I am you might be interested to know that the minutes from the last USTS board meeting are now posted on their web site.
If USTS is going to be an NBRA club I wonder if anyone has given thought to bidding for this summers APBA PRO Nationals.

Maybe APBA should think about its position within the powerboat world and decide if it wants to only be just a regulatory body. If that is the case then what do they need Crown Partners for, as there seems to be little more than a nice webb site created and no promotion. Although Promoting Powerboat racing is a mandate of APBA's unless you consider Crowns Webb building promotion we have another year with no money spent on promotion.

Pat Wright
Region 2 COMMISSIONER.

Hey board get ready to answer as to why there is no PROMOTING OF OUR BRAND AT THE NATIONAL MEETING

[raceright]

https://social.apba-racing.com/uploa...1c4e3ad3cf.pdf
Question where is any funds spent on Promoting Powerboat racing
$63,044.00 Professional fee's (I guess Attorney??) A NYC att.fee's this would
get you about 400 hours of there time.
$21,661.17 Webb Fee's (I guess Crown ??)
$173,921.O3 employee expense (seems very low)
$50.00 Promotion lololololol

I know of companies with 5 times the income of APBA and there attorney fees are no were near $63,000.00 APBA must get into alot of trouble I know nothing about .

Our company webb sites cost under $2,000.00 although maintaining realy does not come into play for us.

[thepiranhabros]

Shocking

https://social.apba-racing.com/uploa...1c4e3ad3cf.pdf
Question where is any funds spent on Promoting Powerboat racing
$63,044.00 Professional fee's (I guess Attorney??) A NYC att.fee's this would
get you about 400 hours of there time.
$21,661.17 Webb Fee's (I guess Crown ??)
$173,921.O3 employee expense (seems very low)
$50.00 Promotion lololololol

I know of companies with 5 times the income of APBA and there attorney fees are no were near $63,000.00 APBA must get into alot of trouble I know nothing about .

Our company webb sites cost under $2,000.00 although maintaining realy does not come into play for us.

As an APBA Commissioner, as much as this torques your nuts, and as important as you make this issue appear, I would hope you have the brains to be asking your questions directly with your other Commissioners and APBA. Because if you are looking for an official response ftom APBA solely on this website, you are going to be sorely disappointed.

[stockc]

The truth is, Matt was disqualified by the Inspector (rightfully so, per the rules). The SORC overturned the Inspector's ruling and reinstated Matt (also rightfully so, per the rules).

How is it possible for both the Inspector and the SORC to be rightfully correct in their rulings, when they came to opposite verdicts?

What is the SORC?

Just trying to understand what happened.

[raceright]

As an APBA Commissioner, as much as this torques your nuts, and as important as you make this issue appear, I would hope you have the brains to be asking your questions directly with your other Commissioners and APBA. Because if you are looking for an official response ftom APBA solely on this website, you are going to be sorely disappointed.

Read my previous post yes myself and several other commissioners are going to ask WHY

[Mrs blueskyracer]

First of all I did not close the thread, lock the thread or delete the threads in question. Taking such action is something that I try not to do I figure you are all adults and everyone is entitled to their opinion and if they were all the same what a boring world this would be. The only way I consider such an action is when a person requesting the action has a reasonable request for a legitimate reason, it is legally questionable not to so so, it doesn't keep with the theme of the site (politics, pornography, inappropriate advertising).

Second let me explain the reasons why it was done. Because I too asked the reason.

#1 The USTS thread - both the president of USTS (Todd Brinkman) and the president of NBRA (Jeff Ruth) asked through phone calls that the thread be removed as there had been no agreement reached, no membership vote taken and no details hammered out between the organizations. Bill VanSteenwyk spoke out of turn on that one especially since he isn't a member of the organizations in question and was not at either of the meetings. Once all the details have been worked out or a decision has been made to discontinue the negotiation process then posts on the subject will be allowed by the organizations. Therefore I have to say I do NOT disagree with this but I would of prefered to close the thread not necessarily delete it if that would of been a viable option for both organizations. Mike was told it needed to be deleted.

#2 The thread on the ASH sponsons. The decision had been rendered, appealed and upheld from what I understand. Seems that any additional discussion should be rule changes for the national meeting regarding the subject. We were asked by Jean MacKay to lock the thread (she is now requesting that it be removed). Reason given was that it is adversely affecting the recovery of someone she holds dear, a fellow boat racer. I do not remember the circumstances of his accident, perhaps our memories are all to short. If I had to guess it would be that it involved sponson tips somehow. Mike said closing the thread seemed to be the right thing to do.

Obviously you guys have figured out that going to Mike is a good way of getting you what you want so you are by passing me with these requests. Unfortunately I was out of town when both of these things happened so he and I could not have a discussion regarding them.

On a side note if you tried posting either one of these issues on the NBRA or USTS or APBA sites I bet they would of been deleted immediately!

Now go ahead an bash on me right here, right now I will give you all 24 hours to get it out of your systems and they I will lock this thread but leave it up so you can all go back and read it as often as you wish.

~Teresa

Added side note - I have been accused of removing threads before that were in fact untouched they had simply dropped down the list of threads so far that they were no longer easily found. So becareful before you cast stones make sure a thread has really been deleted (why I prefer to closed and not delete) and sometimes a private message to ask the reason why it was closed or deleted is a great way to handle a questions if you have one.

[thepiranhabros]

The truth is, Matt was disqualified by the Inspector (rightfully so, per the rules). The SORC overturned the Inspector's ruling and reinstated Matt (also rightfully so, per the rules).

How is it possible for both the Inspector and the SORC to be rightfully correct in their rulings, when they came to opposite verdicts?

What is the SORC?

Just trying to understand what happened.

Good question. Here is how the Inspector was correct in his ruling:

Rule 9 states, "1. Any driver who races a motor or hull that does not meet with specifications as quoted in these rules, will be disqualified and warned. Note: Violations of a non-speed-advantage nature are covered in General Racing Rule 18." (http://www.apba-racing.com/sites/all...2SOMOPRO_3.pdf
)

And here is how the SORC (Stock Outboard Racing Commission, acting as the Referee in this instance) was correct in overturning the Inspector's ruling:

Rule 18.4 states, "Should any boat or owner commit a breach of the rules, which is of a minor or technical nature, and in the judgment of the Referee has had no direct effect on the relative position of the boats at the finish, the Referee shall have the power to decide whether or not such boat shall be disqualified." (http://www.apba-racing.com/sites/all...2GRR-GSR_4.pdf)

The appeal filed overruled the SORC, cancelling the title, rather than issue a warning.

[Dave M]

Confusing ?

Mike,

You made my point on how difficult it is to understand the rules. While we can all read them, how the inspector interprets them can be different than the referee, and or the commision. I truly think this is a crutch that is hindering growth. If you were a new to racing person, and saw the contradicting verdicts, would you trust yourself to interpret a rule later down the road that was perhaps more clouded ?

What is done is done, and it is time to move on from the ASH appeal. The real questions the organization needs to be asking itself is how to act on this as an example of a process that is at best sloppy. There is not any of us who do this as a profession, and rely on the income generated from competing to live on. This is a hobby.

[thepiranhabros]

I'm out

First of all I did not close the thread, lock the thread or delete the threads in question. Taking such action is something that I try not to do I figure you are all adults and everyone is entitled to their opinion and if they were all the same what a boring world this would be. The only way I consider such an action is when a person requesting the action has a reasonable request for a legitimate reason, it is legally questionable not to so so, it doesn't keep with the theme of the site (politics, pornography, inappropriate advertising).

Second let me explain the reasons why it was done. Because I too asked the reason.

#1 The USTS thread - both the president of USTS (Todd Brinkman) and the president of NBRA (Jeff Ruth) asked through phone calls that the thread be removed as there had been no agreement reached, no membership vote taken and no details hammered out between the organizations. Bill VanSteenwyk spoke out of turn on that one especially since he isn't a member of the organizations in question and was not at either of the meetings. Once all the details have been worked out or a decision has been made to discontinue the negotiation process then posts on the subject will be allowed by the organizations. Therefore I have to say I do NOT disagree with this but I would of prefered to close the thread not necessarily delete it if that would of been a viable option for both organizations. Mike was told it needed to be deleted.

#2 The thread on the ASH sponsons. The decision had been rendered, appealed and upheld from what I understand. Seems that any additional discussion should be rule changes for the national meeting regarding the subject. We were asked by Jean MacKay to lock the thread (she is now requesting that it be removed). Reason given was that it is adversely affecting the recovery of someone she holds dear, a fellow boat racer. I do not remember the circumstances of his accident, perhaps our memories are all to short. If I had to guess it would be that it involved sponson tips somehow. Mike said closing the thread seemed to be the right thing to do.

Obviously you guys have figured out that going to Mike is a good way of getting you what you want so you are by passing me with these requests. Unfortunately I was out of town when both of these things happened so he and I could not have a discussion regarding them.

On a side note if you tried posting either one of these issues on the NBRA or USTS or APBA sites I bet they would of been deleted immediately!

Now go ahead an bash on me right here, right now I will give you all 24 hours to get it out of your systems and they I will lock this thread but leave it up so you can all go back and read it as often as you wish.

~Teresa

Added side note - I have been accused of removing threads before that were in fact untouched they had simply dropped down the list of threads so far that they were no longer easily found. So becareful before you cast stones make sure a thread has really been deleted (why I prefer to closed and not delete) and sometimes a private message to ask the reason why it was closed or deleted is a great way to handle a questions if you have one.

This is your website. We are merely invited to be users on your site. You are welcome to have whatever beliefs and policies you want, regardless of how disappointing they are to me personally or how much I disagree with them.

However, your idea of censorship to please the few in spite of the wishes of the many is where I am going to draw the line.

To that end, it is my right to walk away, which is what I intend to do.

I am pulling my own plug.

I will not be back on this site.

You have lost a user.

[Big Don]

Theresa & Mike,

You guys as owners have the right to do what you want with your site.

But I must say, my question was just that, trying to decide what we as racers want going forward.

I think it's complete bs having that tread pulled.

I like others have the right to support this site or not...

As a member of the SORC, I asked a simple question and can't even get that?

I now know how I'll vote on some motions...

Later...off to Boat Racing Facts....

[G Stillwill]

Im sure there are a lot of threads and subjects that up set people and if you were to close everyone of them that did there wouldnt be any threads. The bottom line is when you live in glass houses you have to watch where you throw your stones.

[John Schubert]

USTS to NBRA?

If you were looking for the same thread I am you might be interested to know that the minutes from the last USTS board meeting are now posted on their web site.
If USTS is going to be an NBRA club I wonder if anyone has given thought to bidding for this summers APBA PRO Nationals.

All the denials but below was cut from the minutes of their annual meeting in Chicago which were posted on the USTS web site:

New Business: APBA or NBRA
After lengthy discussion Pete Gryskiewicz made a motion for USTS to join both APBA and NBRA with intent towards NBRA sanctioning for the 2013 SEASON. Second by Paul Bosnich, motion passed.

Sounds like to me the USTS board has already approved the issue whether contracts or agreements have been signed or not.

[Mrs blueskyracer]

All the denials but below was cut from the minutes of their annual meeting in Chicago which were posted on the USTS web site:

New Business: APBA or NBRA
After lengthy discussion Pete Gryskiewicz made a motion for USTS to join both APBA and NBRA with intent towards NBRA sanctioning for the 2013 SEASON. Second by Paul Bosnich, motion passed.

Sounds like to me the USTS board has already approved the issue whether contracts or agreements have been signed or not.

Doesn't it say they are joining both clubs? Doesn't is say "with intent" that doesn't mean firm and written in stone. It does mean that they are working on something. Let's let them work on it and make a presentation to their respective memberships. Now let the USTS/NBRA thing alone guys. Please!

When there is something to report I am sure both organizations will take care of the announcement publically.

Thank you

[Mrs blueskyracer]

Im sure there are a lot of threads and subjects that up set people and if you were to close everyone of them that did there wouldnt be any threads. The bottom line is when you live in glass houses you have to watch where you throw your stones.

My point exactly!

[jswain3]

Usts

I don't think people need to wait for an official announcement.

Isn't the writing is on the wall?
The USTS will save a ton of $.

What would make them not switch?
They're sentimental feelings for APBA & other categories within the organization?
No way.