off topic discussion about current IT issues and more specifically ITB.

[mom'sZ]

How is it not uncool for ITAC or CRB members to vote on cars in their own class? I don't mean IT drivers voting on any IT classification. I mean a ITB driver voting on a ITB classification. Conflict of interest by definition no?

[lateapex911]

How is it not uncool for ITAC or CRB members to vote on cars in their own class? I don't mean IT drivers voting on any IT classification. I mean a ITB driver voting on a ITB classification. Conflict of interest by definition no?

The ITAC members typically abstain. On issues involving my RX-7 in ITA, I would present info, make recommendations, but didn't vote. Same for Andy and his Miata. At that juncture, the committee was larger and usually there were enough votes and most issues resulted in one sided votes.

[mom'sZ]

The ITAC members typically abstain. On issues involving my RX-7 in ITA, I would present info, make recommendations, but didn't vote. Same for Andy and his Miata. At that juncture, the committee was larger and usually there were enough votes and most issues resulted in one sided votes.

I thought I remembered you mentioning that Jake and I think that is cool. Seems having to write it (ITAC members not voting on issues that effect their specific IT class or their specific car) into the rules would kind of suck especially if the group is small or composed of a lot of guys from one class but...
I guess that's what bums me out the most about the recent departures from the ITAC... I had come to trust you guys. Not by blind faith, but by watching what you (not just you Jake, but you the whole commitee) had done and how you had done it.

[gran racing]

David, your request and many others were taken seriously by the ITAC. That's not where the problem lies.

[rsportvolvo]

David, your request and many others were taken seriously by the ITAC. That's not where the problem lies.

I know the ITAC took my request seriously, it's the BoD and CRB that I take issue with. Maybe I should just re-request a line item review. The squeaky wheel gets the grease!

[lateapex911]

David, I can't remember exactly, and I can't go look it up anymore, but there were some volvo questions that took some sorting. I seem to recall your letter was specific regarding spec line issues, but more ambiguous about the cars weight. As in, it wasn't worded in such a way as to be clear that you wanted a weight review.

The committee was/is rather specific in it's responses to questions. If you feel the weight is in error, then by all means re submit. (I'm not sure what the standard will be going forward regarding such requests though...although Bob Dowie stated that it would be 'business as usual" (?) in the SCCA thread. )

That's another point about letters, it makes more sense (to me at least) to send separate letters for separate requests/issues. That way, it's easier for committees to knock it out. If they have to research or table any item of a multi item request, everything gets held up. So, in the future, I'll separate my requests into individual letters when I send them in.

[rsportvolvo]

I tried to cover too much in my request. There were errors in the spec lines that were fixed. I intended or assumed the cars would be run through the process as standard procedure, mistake on my part. Per your suggestion I will request a weight review for each line item as a separate letter.

Sorry for the thread hijacking!