ITAC changes. Chairman resigns.

[lateapex911]

Giles, too?!?

"Boom, baby!"

Who's next...?

Straight answer?
Me.
I sent my resignation letter in today. Last nights con call sealed the deal. The CRB was clear in their direction, and it's not what the members have told me they want. I work for the member, not against him.

Andy was lucky not to be on the call.

For those of you counting, in the past 3(?) months we have lost: Kirk Knestis..a guy with a PHD in policy. The ITAC is ALL about policy. Seemed like a perfect match. And Scott Giles. Honda expert and IT big picture guy extraordinaire. Andy Betterncourt: Great tightrope walker, and explainer of things unexplanable. Got the "big picture". And now me: All of us left, I think it's safe to say, not because we were too big for our britches, but because we believe that the CRB isn't in tune with our bosses, the members.

[JeffYoung]

Andy, Jake, many thanks for all the hard work.....

Not sure where I stand yet, don't want to make a too swift decision.

[benspeed]

Wow - if this doesn't send a message what does?

[Ron Earp]

Jake, thanks for all the work on behalf of us ITers. Again, I am sorry to another respected member resign but it is what it is. All of you fellows did a great job and I think IT is in a much better place due to your labors.

Now, focus on racing and enjoy IT for as long as you can before the CRB takes it some place where we all don't want it to go. All this really makes me consider if I want to build that next IT car or not. Maybe the Z is the end of my IT career.

[mossaidis]

I will echo the same praises, issues and concerns raised here. To Ron's point (i.e. deaf SCCA ears and that IT <> SPU), it would be a sad day if we'll were all forced to make this decision.. go to NASA. I won't say anymore as this is a public forum.

[RacerBill]

I will echo the same praises, issues and concerns raised here. To Ron's point (i.e. deaf SCCA ears and that IT <> SPU), it would be a sad day if we'll were all forced to make this decision.. go to NASA. I won't say anymore as this is a public forum.

NASA - sorry, but that's a really scary thought. The speed differential in some of their run groups is really something else!

[mossaidis]

NASA - sorry, but that's a really scary thought. The speed differential in some of their run groups is really something else!

To clarify, I stated that it would a sad day if the only choice we had was to go NASA. Yes, NASA presents it's own pros and cons.

[dj10]

Can the ITAC still function with the remaining members & what do the remaining members think of all this?

[JoshS]

Andy, Jake, many thanks for all the hard work.....

Not sure where I stand yet, don't want to make a too swift decision.

I'm in the same position as Jeff. I will not make any swift decisions. But I will state that I think that things aren't NEARLY as broken as they have been portrayed, and that IT is by no means on a downhill slope.

It is much better due to the contributions of those who have left recently, mostly in the aspect of the process around the math. The math itself, which is causing a lot of angst, is just a small part of the story and there's plenty of room to come together on this.

[Ron Earp]

I But I will state that I think that things aren't NEARLY as broken as they have been portrayed, and that IT is by no means on a downhill slope.

You mean to say that a CRB that doesn't want the repeatable hp basis process, and is against transparency, isn't nearly as broken as we think? Those two items were at the core of what the ITAC has been trying to accomplish since I began with the SCCA in 2005.

Personally I think things are pretty bad based on those two factors alone.

[JoshS]

... [the CRB] doesn't want the repeatable hp basis process, and is against transparency ...

See, the problem is that everyone is taking these clear, black & white statements as true, but the world is just not that black & white.

Let's let this simmer down for a few days, please. I, for one, would rather try to be part of the solution, not the problem, and all of this rhetoric isn't helping ANYONE.

[jjjanos]

See, the problem is that everyone is taking these clear, black & white statements as true, but the world is just not that black & white.

Let's let this simmer down for a few days, please. I, for one, would rather try to be part of the solution, not the problem, and all of this rhetoric isn't helping ANYONE.

I beg to differ.

The weights on the newly classified cars are not repeatable.
The reason for the weights are not transparent and the CRB went out of their way to hide information.
Members of the ITAC are being told to choke the free flow of information by the CRB.

Repeatability and transparency is like virginity - it's a binary.

[Bill Miller]

This does not bode well for IT. It's becoming more and more obvious that the CRB wants an ITAC that really does nothing. They'd probably be just as happy w/o an ITAC, but organizationally, that doesn't work. What's going on, is that they're making things distasteful and unpleasent for those that won't fall in line, to the point where they will leave. Turns into a win-win for them (CR. They get rid of what they see as the contrarians, and they don't have to remove them (which looks bad).

Kirk, Scott, Andy, and Jake, it really should not have gone down this way. But it's a classic example of why you can't fight city hall. The IT community has suffered a severe loss.

Jake,

I said this over in the sandbox, but I want to say it again here. I was wrong in my assessment of your motives, and I would like to apologize for the crap I've given you over the years.

I also said this over in the sandbox, and I think it needs to be repeated here. Why not move the whole IT deal to NASA? I'm pretty sure they would accept it with open arms. As others have mentioned, tell the SCCA how you feel with your checkbook.

I appreciate the sentiment regarding voting out the existing BoD. Problem is, I don't think the IT community has the political clout to get it done. Too small a group.

[Eagle7]

But I will state that I think that things aren't NEARLY as broken as they have been portrayed, and that IT is by no means on a downhill slope.

It is much better due to the contributions of those who have left recently, mostly in the aspect of the process around the math. The math itself, which is causing a lot of angst, is just a small part of the story and there's plenty of room to come together on this.

Hmmm... That doesn't seem consistent with recent reports. The ITAC runs the process, recommends a weight, and the CRB publishes a different weight, with no documentation nor explanation. The CRB's weight, in many people's opinion, creates new inequities. So, the CRB does not accept the math, does not accept the procedures, does not support documenting their decisions, is unwilling to explain anything, and the result fails the smell test. Sounds pretty dismal to me.

[Knestis]

...It is much better due to the contributions of those who have left recently, mostly in the aspect of the process around the math. The math itself, which is causing a lot of angst, is just a small part of the story and there's plenty of room to come together on this.

I'm sorry, Josh, but the actual math is exactly *zero* of what I'm concerned about.

Now, was much of the angst among the CRB members and the few IT driver-members who voiced public objection to the "process" about the math, and about perceptions that the ITAC was "slave to the formula?" I think, YES. But that's only because they didn't - and still don't - understand the "process around the math," or what I call the Process with a capital P.

K

[Ron Earp]

and about perceptions that the ITAC was "slave to the formula?" I

Hell yeah!! As a scientist I want the ITAC to be slave to a repeatable process and throw out the rules of thumbs, witchcraft, and sorcery used by the CRB to class cars and make comp adjustments. This is IT, not prod.

Josh, how much worse could things get?

[rsportvolvo]

Frustrating situation.

Maybe voting on the upcoming BoD election and participating in NASA events will send a message to the club heirarchy.

[pballance]

Andy,Kirk and Jake, Thank you for your service. There is no doubt in my mind that each of you placed the overall well being of IT above your personal agenda and that you each tried to uphold the core values and beliefs of your fellow IT racers. It is a shame that other's have forgotten that a CLUB serves its members and when it no longer serves its' members it is NO LONGER A CLUB.

Thank you for trying.

Jeff, please do not leave, at least not yet. We still need a sane voice as a member of the ITAC even if your voice echo's in the hollowness of the position...........

Paul

[Knestis]

Straight answer?
Me.
I sent my resignation letter in today. ...

Hoo, boy.

When are those BoD elections again?

K

[irondragon]

Andy B's resignation from ITAC is a real loss for Club Racing.

He and I have tangled over car weights in the past.
I am not the easiest person to convince, but Andy was always patient and entirely
diligent in the way he presented the procedures. Thank you Andy.

If ITAC efforts have just worn Andy out, I am not surprised.
My grumps and queries must have contributed.

I believe that the classification process is no longer working.
Not for lack of effort from ITAC and similar groups that hear from the car people.
These groups pass info, ideas and requests up to CRB and to BoD.

But somehow the decisions made high up don't seem to support the efforts of ITAC et cet.
No wonder Andy Bettencourt has resigned. Our Loss

When will SCCA create a classification process that is transparent , functional and easy to use??

Seems we are far from that.

Bill Miskoe