When do you stop giving people what they ask for?

[lateapex911]

Funny article.
[Rant mode ON]

A guy I know, is got to be the most ego centric dude in the world. he updates his stupid "Bob is" thing three, four , or even more times a day. "Bob is having salad for lunch with oil dressing"....."Bob can't wait for his new model boat to arrive in the UPS shipment".... "Bob is sweating at the gym".

WHO CARES!!!!!!!!!!!!????????

"Bob HATES the new Facebook"

Bob, step away from Facebook.
Sheeesh.
[Rant mode OFF]


here's a discussion the centers around that issue from another board:

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom_sprecher
Basically, give me what I want and the system works for me. Otherwise, I see it as flawed and in need of a different basis to work from.

Like I said, selfish bastard, plain and simple.

(Tom was suggesting that the ITAC be staffed with people wha are elected to the position, to better reflect what the racers want)

my response:

Tom, that's where it gets tricky. The ITAC tries to walk a fine line between giving people what they want, and giving people what they think they want.

The ITAC has an easy job in many respects. While the IT category is large by club standards, it's not National, and with that comes the freedom of being a bit off the radar. In other words, the CRb and the BoD are more likely to let us "try" things that haven't been tried before. (Like "the Process")

Secondly, we can look back at the history of other categories in the club, and learn from their mistakes.

Which is to say: Prod.

Prod is a category that has had lots of troubled waters, and many of the issues stem from giving people what they wanted. it seemed like a good idea at the time, but the long term effects have proven to onerous, and have changed the way racing in the SCCA/Prod world is done.

(I should add that time and technology pose real challenges to racing categories and must be dealt with effectively by organizing committees. )


Trust me, we on the ITAC are always "feeling the pulse" of the membership. I've been to races and talked to hundreds of IT guys from California to Georgia to New Hampshire in just the past year or two. Guys who don't frequent web boards. From all the interface, we've boiled out some cornerstone philosophies. It's those philosophies, and the consistent application of them, that guides the category.

Replacing the ITAc yearly would, in my opinion, create inconsistency, and would ultimately (and quickly) hurt the category. People would run on "Platforms" then spend their time trying to enact their particular platform. Committee members should, in my opinion, always remember the core philosophies that guide the category/committee, and never forget that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

I know the current system could be seen as un American and rather dictatorship-like, but I think the benefits outweigh the possible downside and perceptions.
(Further, every racing organization that hasn't been run by a benevolent dictator has failed. Every time.)
__________________

[Ron Earp]

Trust me, we on the ITAC are always "feeling the pulse" of the membership.

And I might add you folks do so pretty well.

One comment about any ITAC crew I would like to suggest is that ITAC members be CURRENT IT racers, that is, having participated in at least one or two IT races in the last twelve months to remain on the committee. Seems that a vested interest would be a good thing.

[dickita15]

A question that anyone representing a group whether appointed or elected is always do you enact the will of those you represent or do you owe those people your best judgment.
Usually the people in positions of power have spent more time thinking about an issue and listening to arguments than the average man on the street. For proof check out any news show man on the street interviews.
To vote against a populist opinion you need conviction, thought and a bit of ego, but I have more respect for someone with consistent convictions than someone who blows in the wind even if I disagree on a given issue.

[tom_sprecher]

Jeez, all I want is a couple of freakin' jacking plates. That, and a way to influence people to get what I want. Is that so much to ask?

[lateapex911]

Jeez, all I want is a couple of freakin' jacking plates. That, and a way to influence people to get what I want. Is that so much to ask?

Three words of advice: be creative. be diligent, and be patient.

[Ed Funk]

Three words of advice: be creative. be diligent, and be patient.

---uh, that's seven words---

[EV]

---uh, that's seven words---

Who does he think he is, Joe Biden?

[dickita15]

Jeez, all I want is a couple of freakin' jacking plates. That, and a way to influence people to get what I want. Is that so much to ask?

I feel your pain Tom. I got tired of waiting, when I retubed my car I built them into the front down tubes. I wish they were a little more to the rear but they work ok.

[D. Ellis-Brown]

I agree we should be able to install jacking plates. I don't know about anyone else, but the underside of my car, no matter how careful we are, is a dented, distorted mess. Maybe some of you in other parts of the country do not have to jack up your cars in sandy paddocks like we do in the Florida, but it is always tricky getting the jack in the right location. I know several of my compatriouts tried to work the "jacking plates" issue when Enduros were initiated many years ago. And it fell on deaf ears then. To me it is absolutley ridiculous that something so functional, so necessary, so logical has been resisted in the past. But, like our Federal Government, logic and common sense will not be tolerated, David Ellis-Brown

[Knestis]

>> ...logic and common sense will not be tolerated.

That's hyperbolic and not fair.

If the ITAC were "responsive" to the wishes of everybody, IT would no longer be IT in very short order. Everyone wants a different thing and the SUM of those things takes us way beyond the category as it's currently defined.

Now, if we required a majority of IT car owners to endorse a proposed change before we considered it, that would be one thing, but we tend to view a half dozen vocal members as substantial support. That's just not a good idea.

As an ITAC member, I very much view my first obligation as being to the long term health of the category, and that outweighs what current members want. (Remember that member turnover in the club is such that several HUNDRED THOUSAND have come and gone in the time I've been a member. Yes - that means that I (and the rest of the ITAC) have to apply what we think is our best judgement toward that goal, running the risk of being accused of neglecting "what the membership wants." But that's how it is.

K

[1stGenBoy]

And I might add you folks do so pretty well.

One comment about any ITAC crew I would like to suggest is that ITAC members be CURRENT IT racers, that is, having participated in at least one or two IT races in the last twelve months to remain on the committee. Seems that a vested interest would be a good thing.

That is one of the reasons I stepped down from the ITAC , that and I have moved on to other duties within SCCA. I did not think it was right to make decsisions on a class I was not participating in very much.

Bob Clark