TOPIC: ESAP Proposal

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #693

  • Gil Gauger
  • Offline
  • Posts: 5
  • Thank you received: 0
My Position: There are four of us who are in the position of being required to view this proposal from two distinct perspectives, as a member and also as an officer. In my role as an officer I have, based upon the forewarning of my predecessors that the time for a decision was at hand and having accepted my nomination and subsequent election (draft:) being so informed, given this issue what I believe to be fair and due diligence. I view the LSF as a voluntary membership organization which, by nature of its design, does not conduct regularly scheduled meetings of the membership at large and therefore requires issues such as this to be addressed via long range communication methods. I have viewed this process as such: a motion to allow 'winch in the nose' was made and rejected by acclamation, a motion was made by a member(s) in good standing to adopt a separate accomplishment program and the motion seconded. The 'floor' was opened for discussion for a defined time period. Discussion has been concluded. The revised motion is now up for ballot. All of this has been done in as open as possible fashion for an organization that only offers 3 days at the Toledo Expo and 9 days or so at the NATS as the only possible face to face time by utilizing the best methods available. My contributions along the way as a member of the board have been mainly in an oversight role seeking to safeguard the bylaws. I am still required by the bylaws to vote on any bylaw changes which are in play at this time. I thank all who have contributed, just as I have tried to do myself, by pouring over the bylaws with a fine tooth comb and identifying every point. At this time I am still very concerned about all the little details where the proposed bylaw changes, if adopted, will be in conflict with wording in sundry and various other documents such as the forms and website. These are details which I have outlined as a board member during this process but believe can be overcome by people of good faith and diligence. My position, as an officer, has been, and is at this time, to put this issue before the membership.
As a member in good standing, LSF 6333, I have a different and personal perspective. I do not care to debate the point here on this forum but I will publicly state that my vote on the proposal is and will be forwarded as: NO
The topic has been locked.

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #694

  • Larry Jolly
  • Offline
  • Posts: 27
  • Thank you received: 0
Dear Gil,
I appeciate your prgamatic approach to this proposal..I am surprised at the current attitude, that seems to be is any ESAP is better than the what We have now.. I am in favor of a total and complete SAP that is truly a separate entity.. I am very disappointed at the program proposed and am truly dismayed at the amount of bylaws contortions and twisting that is needed by the current proposal to fit the LSF idea. So while I am for an ESAP it is not this one..I already voted NO...
However I do have a question. I spoke to Jim sometime ago about the lack of LSF exposure at the major shows and contests. I mentioned that I though the current method where officers go hang out at Toledo with their old flying buddies was certainly a costly non productive activity. I suggested that the LSF put together a traveling promotion kit that would allow interested clubs or vendors place the LSF traveling booth in a prominant location at their event and man it with interested LSF members. I have no idea how much it costs the LSF to send the leadership to Toledo but I am guessing there is no way it is even comes close to break even... I would volunteer to host the LSF promo booth at any event where I have a booth and I am sure that other LSFers would probably do the same. Just a thought for the future as I am thinking more exposure would help the cause.. By the way thank you for your years of service to the organization.. Larry
The topic has been locked.

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #695

  • Curtis Suter
  • Offline
  • Posts: 67
  • Thank you received: 0
Personally I think that the LSF Board should be able to add as many SAP's as they want to the LSF without any vote as long as they are 100% totally separate programs (SAP's).
This proposal does not pass that test.

Curtis
The topic has been locked.

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #696

  • Red Scholefield
  • Offline
  • Posts: 10
  • Thank you received: 0
As a somewhat inactive member I am reminded of the IMAA situation of a few years ago. Refusal to change has resulted in the near death of the organization, maybe not dead but certainly on life support. Electric soaring will continue to grow regardless of the outcome of the vote ESAP. I would hate to see LSF go the same way as the IMAA when a favorable vote for ESAP would enhance the health of the LSF considerably.

I would like to pick up trying to move up a level or so, but probably won't bother if ESAP is killed.

Red S AMA 951 LSF 412
The topic has been locked.

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #697

  • Ed Anderson
  • Offline
  • Posts: 105
  • Thank you received: 0

ggauger wrote: My Position: There are four of us who are in the position of being required to view this proposal from two distinct perspectives, as a member and also as an officer. In my role as an officer I have, based upon the forewarning of my predecessors that the time for a decision was at hand and having accepted my nomination and subsequent election (draft:) being so informed, given this issue what I believe to be fair and due diligence. I view the LSF as a voluntary membership organization which, by nature of its design, does not conduct regularly scheduled meetings of the membership at large and therefore requires issues such as this to be addressed via long range communication methods. I have viewed this process as such: a motion to allow 'winch in the nose' was made and rejected by acclamation, a motion was made by a member(s) in good standing to adopt a separate accomplishment program and the motion seconded. The 'floor' was opened for discussion for a defined time period. Discussion has been concluded. The revised motion is now up for ballot. All of this has been done in as open as possible fashion for an organization that only offers 3 days at the Toledo Expo and 9 days or so at the NATS as the only possible face to face time by utilizing the best methods available. My contributions along the way as a member of the board have been mainly in an oversight role seeking to safeguard the bylaws. I am still required by the bylaws to vote on any bylaw changes which are in play at this time. I thank all who have contributed, just as I have tried to do myself, by pouring over the bylaws with a fine tooth comb and identifying every point. At this time I am still very concerned about all the little details where the proposed bylaw changes, if adopted, will be in conflict with wording in sundry and various other documents such as the forms and website. These are details which I have outlined as a board member during this process but believe can be overcome by people of good faith and diligence. My position, as an officer, has been, and is at this time, to put this issue before the membership.
As a member in good standing, LSF 6333, I have a different and personal perspective. I do not care to debate the point here on this forum but I will publicly state that my vote on the proposal is and will be forwarded as: NO


Very well stated.

While I won't vote with you I like the way you analyzed the situation.

Well done!
The topic has been locked.

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #698

  • Don Harban
  • Offline
  • Posts: 43
  • Thank you received: 0
Those of you who know me also know that there have been few others who have advocated as long and as hard for an ESAP. My advocacy for an LSF program goes back to the day that Dave Register and I likely became two of the earliest guys to go set foot on the same field with altitude limiters and discover the potential for this new kind of soaring. And I appreciate the enthusiasm that many here have expressed. But I have decided to vote NO on the current proposal. I have three general problems with the current proposal:

THE PROCESS

I can ignore the simple fact that the drafters of the proposal completely ignored many good and valid suggestions for a new ESAP. It does strongly suggest that they had no intent from the beginning of considering anything that was not already a part of their agenda. And, in my opinion, does not reflect well on the possibility that members' views will be reasonably considered in the future. As a long time Level IV I do, however, have an insurmountable problem with the committee's interpretation of what constitutes fulfilling the letter and the spirit of the LSF Bylaws with regard to voting ON THE BIGGEST CHANGE IN THE LSF'S HISTORY. I won't pick nits with regard to whether any extraordinary effort should have been made to get the word (and ballots) out to ACTIVE MEMBERS, but relying wholly on communication by electronic means is a travesty. I think it is reasonable to consider that every LSF member who is still actually flying is an ACTIVE MEMBER. And it is reasonable to assume that the overwhelming majority of people who are actually flying belong to the AMA and receive the AMA's monthly fish wrap (MA magazine). And it is further reasonable to assume that those of who fly gliders look for articles about gliders in that particular magazine before it gets pitched into the circular file. There is no excuse for failing to post an article about the BIGGEST CHANGE IN LSF HISTORY in MA -- not only to fulfill the intent of the bylaws, but to publicize to the entire MODEL FLYING WORLD that the LSF was seeking to broaden its base of participants. FREE PUBLICITY -- TRY IT SOMETIME.

While I have asked several times, I have yet to have any response as to HOW MANY so-called "electronic ballots" would be sent out.

THE PRODUCT

The ESAP proposed is silly and inadequate. It does not reflect that anything has happened to soaring in general and electric soaring in particular in the decades that have passed since the original SAP was devised. It is one thing to worship some sacred ritual. It is another thing entirely to stick your head in the sand and blindly fail to reflect on how something new might be even better. I will not subscribe to the notion that this ESAP is better than nothing. Accepting it, as we have seen with the SAP, means that we will be forced to worship it in toto for the rest of eternity. Accepting the proposed ESAP is worse than nothing because it will forever preclude a better solution.

The other aspect of the proposed ESAP which is absolutely unacceptable to me as a Level IV is its failure to distinguish between people who come up through the SAP, the ESAP or, in the case of people like me BOTH. It did not require rocket science to accomplish this and it mystifies me why this simple notion was utterly ignored.

THE FUTURE

At the current time the LSF serves as the SIG representative for electric soaring. I am appalled at the LSF's failure to respect the intent of it's bylaws with respect to implementing THE BIGGEST CHANGE IN LSF HISTORY and with its apparent willingness to utterly disregard views of its members. I fully appreciate the positive role that the LSF has played in supporting eSoaring so far. But I have serious reservations as to whether it will fairly represent our interests in the future.

This vote may have big implications in the future. I am not willing to satisfy a short term desire to have this ESAP at the cost of getting it right for the long term.

My vote is NO.

Happy Landings,

Don
The topic has been locked.

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #699

  • Ray Hayes
  • Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Thank you received: 0
Don,

Wow, You saved me a bunch of time by covering many of my thoughts with your post. I vote No also.

Just seems like it was rushed and predetermined. I have a huge concern for the future of soaring and see the e-powered sailplane movement as a stimulus to grow our hobby. Let's get the ESAP Right, probably our only shot at it as Don said.

My biggest concern is the health of SOARING CLUBS and they are on the decline ... not good for AMA at $58.00 a crack and not good for LSF . You would think the availability of ARF's would be a boon to club membership, but here in my neck of the woods, in four states, club membership is fading noticeably.

My Biggest recommendation to any soaring club or LSF is, get us on TV, get us some grade A exposure . We have been flying in the boonies way too long without exposure. Get a TV station from INDY to cover Soaring at the Nats, get us on the TV local shows. RC Soaring needs TV and Internet exposure. And it isn't all about contests, a low percentage of sailplane pilots are interested in contests. But, clubs without new members will never spawn many contests enthusiast .


Ray
Woodys Forever .. But they probably won't be flying ALES much.
WWW.Skybench.com
The topic has been locked.

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #700

  • Red Scholefield
  • Offline
  • Posts: 10
  • Thank you received: 0
Kicking the ESAP can down the road will cause some of the potential ESAP members and even some present members into e-soaring to wonder if LSF really needs or wants them.

I vote Yes,

Red S LSF412
The topic has been locked.

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #701

  • Preston Heller
  • Offline
  • Posts: 90
  • Thank you received: 0
No surprises yet. But we only have about 28 more days to hear more lobbying. Yippee.
The topic has been locked.

ESAP Proposal 3 years 11 months ago #702

  • Ryan Woebkenberg
  • Offline
  • Posts: 129
  • Thank you received: 0

RayHayes wrote: My biggest concern is the health of SOARING CLUBS and they are on the decline .


I think they are on the decline because of prevalent attitudes of "X is killing the hobby. Y is the only true path" in many of the clubs in your area.

Preston Heller wrote: But we only have about 28 more days to hear more lobbying.


The interweb heartache about this is never going to end.

Ryan
The topic has been locked.
Time to create page: 0.294 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum