Points of clarification. (Not aimed at you DJ, LOL)

1- The slandering I was referring to was made by certain posters here and on other forums, and aimed at members of the ITAC, and were based on the fact that the ITAC members -

A- Repeated what they were told by others higher up the food chain about certain SCCA policys or data,
or
B- Were involved in the eyes of the poster in ways that displeased them.

Since I am merely reporting what I think the situation is, I want to be clear that I am not stating anything as first person fact, as I just don't know, but rather aas a pretty well educated guess. and I won't tolerate any slandering becuase it was taken as fact. In other words, enough is enough...we're (ITAC guys) happy to try and clear things up, but we need to be treated fairly.

2- The weight "issue" I was referring to was the placement rule, not the weight vs the SIR.

3- The ITAC made it's opinion known to the CRB and has also made it's opinion known regarding the timing of the SIR implementation. Input has been recieved from the SCCA population, and if there is more that anyone feels needs to be said, I encourage them to submit it.

4- The PLACEMENT rule was what I referring to in my post, and I thought it was a done deal long ago, but evidently, it wasn't and needs to be handled by the book, it appears.