I read the term "rules creep" in many posts here, and it always seems to have negative conotations...

But...is it really THAT bad???

The automotive world, and racing has changed a LOT since the 80s, and so has the ametuer club racer.

How many of us would drive our car to the track, and to work if the rules mandated that the dual nature of the car was retained? I doubt that even 5% would. The rest of us would have cars that COULD be driven to work, but would have them on stands in the garage, just as we do now.

That's just one example of the evolution of the class...and lots of rules "crept" to change the dual purpose car into a more track dedicated car.

Recently Kirk Knestis wrote here on IT.com that he planned to write in a request to allow changes regarding the central lock system. A rule that could be considered "rules creep" but is actually a reasonable concept for todays cars.

I read certain posts that say they want IT to adapt and be vital in the "new world", but in the same paragraph warn against allowing rules creep.

So..I think rules creep is a part of the landscape...a necessary evil, if you will. Some rule changes are required, others are "good ideas" and some are bad ideas...even though the powers that be think they are required.

So...what are examples of how "rules creep" has ruined..or damaged..IT racing???

Bill?