Quote:
lateapex911 ... "Actually, yes, I think perception of fair treatment is important, & I bet more people out there are happier w/the method the ITAC uses than the Prod guys."
Don't flatter yourself. Things were supposed to change w/the introduction of the Ad Hoc groups. All it did was give the CB/CRB another place to bury items they do not want to deal with. I've had a request buried somewhere in that circus tent for almost a year now. Hell, it wasn't even a personal item, but a general one that made the racers' life easier & took you guys out of the micro-management business (which is probably why it remains buried).
And I am still looking at a response that Andy gave to me on a car weight. The logic of that response was lost in the absolute absurdity of his thought process.
From what I have seen of late, it appears that your idea of "fair treatment" is everyone getting the same amount of ineptitude.
As far as being "... happier w/the method ...", I will give you that one only because the IT Ad Hoc group has not been drawn into the "equivalency wars" that the GT, Production & Touring Ad Hoc groups have had to deal w/for years. You stick a car in a class, & if nobody races it for 3/4/5 years, you all go DUH & reclassify it. Ya gotta admit, there ain't a lot of thought process going on here. And that was my point when I quoted 9.1.3.B. The National IT guys are not going to be willing to do business as usual in that sense (9.1.3.B). At that point in time, the Ad Hoc group will be brought into having to deal w/who gets what (ala GT, Production, etc.). Put another way, nobody gets a free pass in this move.
[/b]