Special Stage Forums banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
To any PRB members (or anyone else who knows):

What is the status of the new Operations Manual?
When will it be available to organizers and other interested parties?

Thanks,
Rick
 

·
www.christianedstrom.com
Joined
·
2,144 Posts
>What is the status of the new Operations Manual?

Was received and reviewed by the BoD at their December meeting.

>When will it be available to organizers and other interested
>parties?

It will be sent to organizers in the first two weeks of 2004. I _think_ the Sno*Drift organizers have an advance copy.

- Christian

Bjorn Christian Edstrom
www.christianedstrom.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
I still think it should be available to the membership at large. It helps everyone understand how the SCCA is addressing safety issues and event organization. Many members either volunteer or compete and are impacted by procedures that I assume (well I can only assume) are in the document.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
527 Posts
Is this the RFO's or something else? How does the non-SCCA organizer get one? I'm sure it's a gold mine of organizing information.

[hr]
CP
[hr]
 

·
www.christianedstrom.com
Joined
·
2,144 Posts
>Is this the RFO's or something else? How does the non-SCCA
>organizer get one? I'm sure it's a gold mine of organizing
>information.

This is a new document that supplants the current RFO's.

I'd say the non-SCCA organizer doesn't get one. There seems to be no compelling reason for the SCCA to share their intellectual property with organizers affiliated with other sanctioning bodies, does there?

Perhaps NASA will come out with their own Ops Manual.

>[hr]
>
CP
>[hr]

- Christian

Bjorn Christian Edstrom
www.christianedstrom.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
527 Posts
Funny, I didn't say anything about NASA, and yes, I would think the SCCA would for a price, since they're all about making a buck anyway. I'd be willing to pay a little something for information like that (that other organizers have collectively pooled together over the years), even though I have access to vastly greater resources already, but there's always more to be gained. That way I would know how the SCCA expects things done and then do the opposite. :) I was just wondering...no need to get snappy.

[hr]
CP
[hr]
 

·
www.christianedstrom.com
Joined
·
2,144 Posts
>Funny, I didn't say anything about NASA,

No, but it's fairly well known that the Desert Storm rally is a NASA event. Nothing wrong with that; I thoroughly enjoyed spectating at the Ramada Express, for instance.

(snide remarks about SCCA only wanting to make a buck excised)

> even
>though I have access to vastly greater resources already,

(sigh)

>That way I would know
>how the SCCA expects things done and then do the opposite.

(sigh again)

Look, Chris, I don't have any agenda except to try and get people excited about rallying. I couldn't care less about the whole NASA vs. SCCA debate. I consider Ray and Roger friends, and I like John and Kendall, too, though I know them less well. If they help sanction succesful events, and the number of events in this country increases, that's better for all of us.

Hell, I think NASA Rally has a lot of potential - among the biggest possibilities available to them is the ability to simply re-write the rulebook from scratch! But I don't expect NASA to produce documentation and send it to Topeka for immediate review. Nor do I expect the opposite.

If I were an organizer of open mind, and wanted to investigate what type of additional costs and benefits of the requirements of the different sanctioning bodies was, before deciding on a sanction, I might call and try to get a copy of the operational manuals for each sanctioning body.

But to do so while identifying yourself as a "non-SCCA organizer" seems a bit disingenous, don't you think?

In any event, I haven't much interest in getting in a pissing contest with you. Enjoy your "vastly greater resources" and put on a good rally.

- Christian

Bjorn Christian Edstrom
www.christianedstrom.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,998 Posts
> I was just wondering...no need to get snappy.

I suspect Christian, who has seen the new manual, was responding to the countless hours spent by dozens of SCCA organizers, workers and other volunteers in creating it. SCCA would be doing its members a disservice if they didn't protect their copyright.

Of course nothing stops someone from obtaining a copy and reading it...there's nothing really new in it, and certainly nothing secret.

Bruce
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
527 Posts
>(snide remarks about SCCA only wanting to make a buck
>excised)

Tounge in cheek...with a little seriousness thrown in, everybody knows it's all about the green...


>
>> even
>>though I have access to vastly greater resources already,
>

VERY tongue in cheek...

>
>>That way I would know
>>how the SCCA expects things done and then do the opposite.

Again, tongue in cheek, duh.


>Look, Chris, I don't have any agenda except to try and get
>people excited about rallying.

DITTO.


>Hell, I think NASA Rally has a lot of potential - among the
>biggest possibilities available to them is the ability to
>simply re-write the rulebook from scratch! But I don't
>expect NASA to produce documentation and send it to Topeka
>for immediate review. Nor do I expect the opposite.

The thing that NASA (and perhaps USAC and others) recognizes and the SCCA apparently doesn't is that that potential is within and among the ORGANIZERS, not the sanctioning body itself. And that may change with the SCCA, I do sincerely hope the best for them.


>If I were an organizer of open mind, and wanted to
>investigate what type of additional costs and benefits of
>the requirements of the different sanctioning bodies was,
>before deciding on a sanction, I might call and try to get a
>copy of the operational manuals for each sanctioning body.

Done that. I've read over SCCA's RFO's. Of course, NASA has no such thing for rally yet.


>But to do so while identifying yourself as a "non-SCCA
>organizer" seems a bit disingenous, don't you think?

Disingenuous? Nah...frankly, it's just the opposite...I could have lied about who I was and tried to ask for one? It's kind of obvious that I value SOMETHING the SCCA has to offer, especially if I'm willing to pay something for it.


>...put on a good rally.

I intend to, thanks for the encouragement. Hope you're there! :)

[hr]
CP
[hr]
 

·
Four tree two remember Andrew
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
Christian said:

>I'd say the non-SCCA organizer doesn't get one. There seems
>to be no compelling reason for the SCCA to share their
>intellectual property with organizers affiliated with other
>sanctioning bodies, does there?
>
>Perhaps NASA will come out with their own Ops Manual.
>
>- Christian
>
>Bjorn Christian Edstrom
>www.christianedstrom.com

Bruce said:

>I suspect Christian, who has seen the new manual, was
>responding to the countless hours spent by dozens of SCCA
>organizers, workers and other volunteers in creating it.
>SCCA would be doing its members a disservice if they didn't
>protect their copyright.
>
>Of course nothing stops someone from obtaining a copy and
>reading it...there's nothing really new in it, and certainly
>nothing secret.
>
>Bruce

Bruce and Christian:

Please note that some "non-SCCA organizers" contributed to that document, including myself. Just an observation.

Secondly, I would hope that anything that can make our sport safer would be considered by all involved (regardless of who sanctions, FIA, USAC, SCCA, or NASA) as a guide to running a safe event. I know that I have studied FIA as well as Motorsports NZ, MSA and other bodies' organizational materials to see what could be gleaned and used to make an event run more smoothly and safely. In fact, some of the information I contributed to the manual came from some of those sources.

Wilson
NASA Member and SCCA Member
 

·
www.christianedstrom.com
Joined
·
2,144 Posts
>Wilson
>NASA Member and SCCA Member

Wilson, I agree wholeheartedly, but I was calling Chris on the fact that I think it's disingenuous to request the document and identify yourself as a "non-SCCA" organizer.

If you're intent on shunning an organization, it is unethical to take the product of many hours of that organizations' volunteers and staffmembers solely for your own profit. Sort of a "haha! suckers" free-rider attitude, if you will.

If Chris had asked as a 'interested member of the rally community,' I'd had no objections. Hell, I'd have sent him a soft copy.

But he didn't. He explicitly called himself a "non-SCCA" organizer.

- Christian

Bjorn Christian Edstrom
www.christianedstrom.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
If it in any way regulates or affects how an event is run, then the SCCA should make it public.

> Of course nothing stops someone from obtaining a copy and reading it...there's nothing really new in it, and certainly nothing secret.

If there's nothing new or secret in it, then why not be open and accountable?

Glenn
 

·
www.christianedstrom.com
Joined
·
2,144 Posts
>If there's nothing new or secret in it, then why not be open
>and accountable?

It's coming. It's coming. It's coming.

I PROMISE it's coming.

- Christian

Officially the only official of any rally sanctioning body about to be fired for the amount of posts on ss.com.

Bjorn Christian Edstrom
www.christianedstrom.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
672 Posts
Dear Friends,

I volunteered my help and put over 16 hours into the process of creating the SCCA's document before removing myself from the process. I bailed out because I felt my input was not welcomed (or possibly considered valuable) by the group assembled to create the SCCA operations manual.

NASA is in the process of completing documents that will accomplish the same goal. A wise organizer (or sanctioning body) looks for the best ideas regardless of the source. The process of developing the NASA documents was done with documents graciously provided by the Motor Sport Associations of New Zealand and Canada. We appreciate their help and support in allowing us to freely use their documents.

We are quick to forget that everything in this sport comes from the people involved in the sport over the last 30 years. There are few really new ideas and most of our rules and procedures are borrowed from Europe and G.B. The work, effort, and creativity of this collective group is not the property of the SCCA or any other organization. You can stick a copyright mark on anything but it doesn't mean you own it.

Ray Hocker
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
>Officially the only official of any rally sanctioning body
>about to be fired for the amount of posts on ss.com.

And you're doing such good work following Steve Johnson's published cry for open communication!
[hr]
(Meant sincerely, not satirically.... you, Bruce and George are especially generous with your time and willingness to share, which we all appreciate.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
>
>I volunteered my help and put over 16 hours into the process
>of creating the SCCA's document before removing myself from
>the process. I bailed out because I felt my input was not
>welcomed (or possibly considered valuable) by the group
>assembled to create the SCCA operations manual.


It was a disappointment when Ray decided not continue his participation. I cannot recall anything in the actual process that would have made him feel unwelcomed, but that does not mean there were not other contributing factors.

I am looking forward to more formal information from NASA. It will help in making many decision including insurance providers.

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
946 Posts
>
>>If there's nothing new or secret in it, then why not be open
>>and accountable?
>
>It's coming. It's coming. It's coming.
>
>I PROMISE it's coming.
>
>- Christian
>
>Officially the only official of any rally sanctioning body
>about to be fired for the amount of posts on ss.com.
>
>Bjorn Christian Edstrom
>www.christianedstrom.com

I was wondering that myself. I appreciate the time you put in on this silly site.

You must wear your nomex undies pretty much 24-7, to still be posting on this site.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
527 Posts
>Wilson, I agree wholeheartedly, but I was calling Chris on
>the fact that I think it's disingenuous to request the
>document and identify yourself as a "non-SCCA" organizer.

Again, it's not disingenuous at all...it's too bad I have to defend myself against a perfectly GENUINE request, even one that I'm willing to pay for! MONEY, MONEY, MONEY...now do I have your attention? Oh wait, it's not series sponsor money, or manufacturer money.


>If you're intent on shunning an organization, it is
>unethical to take the product of many hours of that
>organizations' volunteers and staffmembers solely for your
>own profit. Sort of a "haha! suckers" free-rider attitude,
>if you will.

You're being overly defensive. I am willing to SHELL OUT CASH for a document published and "COPYRIGHTED" by an organization who has borrowed most of the content from VOLUNTEERS! This is intellectual property that organizers over the years have compiled and shared with the SCCA in good faith with little expectation of return.


>If Chris had asked as a 'interested member of the rally
>community,' I'd had no objections. Hell, I'd have sent him
>a soft copy.

Now who's being disingenuous?


>He explicitly called himself a "non-SCCA"
>organizer.

No I didn't. My question was purely hypothetical.

I can't believe I'm having to defend myself over a perfectly legitimate request. This is silly. No wonder people are fleeing the SCCA like sheep from a wolfpack.


[hr]
CP
[hr]
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top