I'm not endorsing the idea that the CC got this wrong. I'm endorsing the idea that it might have got it wrong and I see no harm in someone trying to determine that.

Frankly, I'd like to go to VIR over Mothers Day and the likelihood that I go depends on whether MARRS is there for the double M/S event. If MARRS goes, I'll proably crew or flag. If they don't, I'll try to drive the weekend. Why? 89 cars in a single group won't happen if MARRS isn't there.

I'm confused...and I am sure I'm not seeing the deep down facts, or have them wrong. But, it seems like Jones didn't really compete in the MARRS series last year, so whats the big deal?[/b]
re: G.R. Jones finished 4th in the points for ITC.

re: deep down facts - traditional SCCA problems - large group of alpha males, lack of communication and the traditional feeling, whether justified or not, that higher command is promoting its own agenda and not the wishes of the rank-and-file.

Alpha males: I think this one explains itself.

Communication: The committee last issued official minutes...never. Reliance on DRs to get the word out insufficient as some reps are good about soliciting input and providing reports, others are not so good. E.g. is the reason the date or operational matters?

From my DR, I was left with the impresion that it was a combination of both, but that if progress was made on the operational matters, we would return if another VIR date could not be had. Others are maintaining that the issue was the specific date only and that a return for the double was never even on the table. That's a communication breakdown.

Agendas: We've just been told that the only independently verifiable source of driver sentiment - the open meeting - is completely disregraded as a source for determining drivers' desires. It is only to provide additional options. Well, there's not much point in having the bloody meeting then is there?

Agendas: A driver who participates in the series is attempting to determine whether the committee accurately represented the desires of the majority of the drivers and he is basically told to STFU and live with what he's been told. Kind of gives one a warm and fuzzy feeling about just how accurately the wishes of the drivers have been represented, doesn't it?

The committee bascially can make decisions against the wishes of the majority of the participants - both drivers and officials - in the series because the committee's decisions are done by majority vote of those sitting on the committee regardless of how many stakeholders they represent. Think Senate, not House of Reps. It then it can correctly claim that the majority prevailed, but at the same time, the majority really didn't. Or did it?

E.g. the pace car rep gets the same vote that the F&C chief does. ITC gets the same vote that SM gets. FF, CF, FA, FB, FE, FM, FC each could get a vote despite there being about 9 people in total who compete in those classes while ITA, who represents 20+ gets a single vote. Thank gawd the fast formula guys only send a single rep.

Heck, I'm in ITC and I think my own class probably shouldn't have a rep in 2008 based on the projected participation in the class, but as long as I'm entitled to a vote for the about 5 drivers who are going to compete, I'm in favor of using it.