dHarban wrote: I am puzzled as to why expanding those who are qualified to display the achievement badges (the Roman Numerals I thru V) does not constitute a change in the existing SAP.
The SAP is the only LSF document that specifically details that individuals who have completed the requirements of the SAP may display certain emblems -- RED Roman Numerals I thru V -- in conjunction with the LSF emblem. Inasmuch as these emblems -- the RED Roman Numerals I thru V -- are explicitly designated as the method for displaying completion of achievements under the SAP, that should preclude their use by others for other purposes.
The BYLAWS describe the use of the LSF insignia to designate LSF membership and might be reasonably construed to include membership via the ESAP. ONLY THE SAP describes the use of the RED Roman Numerals I thru V by MEMBERS WHO HAVE MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THES SAP. That should effectively preclude ANYONE ELSE from using them.
The current proposal clearly changes the existing SAP even though it does not modify its words. It changes it by modifying who is entitled to display the symbols defined within the SAP. C'mon guys. The same logic being applied to circumvent the specific wording of the SAP with regard to the display of achievement levels could easily be used in the future to modify the Bylaws to allow SAP achievements to apply toward the ESAP -- thereby effectively gutting the existing SAP of meaning.
Happy Landings,
Don
LSF IV 2763
I follow your logic and inference.
However, as you posted, you feel something "should mean", but it does not say that.
And you say it "might reasonably be construed", but we have clear words to show that it does not mean that.
And you feel "that should effectively preclude anyone else", but it does not say that either.
The current proposal clearly does not change the SAP.
It does expand the ways that one can become a member of LSF and the SIG, but does not change the current SAP.
It does not change the rights and privileges of how current SAP members may display their achievement. It does allow another part of LSF to likewise display their level of achievement within that program.
This comes down to the philosophy of scarcity vs. abundance.
The philosophy of scarcity says that if more people have what I have, somehow what I have has been diminished in value even though nothing has been taken from me. If there are more LSF Vs then the accomplishment of being an LSF V is somehow diminished.
The philosophy of abundance says that what I have maintains its value even if others have the same. If I have achieved LSF V then my accomplishment is clear. If you also achieve LSF V, my accomplishment is not diminished.
I agree that a separate numbering designation would be best but the fact that that is not part of the proposal does not, in my opinion, change the SAP program in any way, shape or form.