Bram:
Maybe I missed an e-mail yesterday concerning the rules, but I did get
one e-mail from you today that lists changes to Rule 2.1.4, Rule 3.1a, Rule
4.2, Rule 4.7.2, Rule 5.5 and 5.6, Rule 5.12.4, Rule 5.133.3b, and Rule 5.13.6c.
I have just received your attached e-mail regarding your list yesterday
that states "the first change is for section A and the other for section B."
So I take it there are only two changes contained in that e-mail. And,
if you do not mind my asking, What are they?
I am also forwarding the e-mails I received today and to whcih I am
referring. Please feel free to post your answer to this e-mail so everyone can
see
it.
Thank you in advance.
Eldon
Subj: proposed changes to the rules
Date: 11/25/2003 12:19:15 AM Central Standard Time
From: BDally6107@xxxxxxx
To: swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Here are the guts of the rule changes and reasoning that I proposing. Actual
language needs to be finished. Remember, these are recommendations and
subject to debate. Because my voice is shot, I've not had the opportunity to
run
them by my normal sounding board (Greg Ryan). I know that I can count on Greg
to take issue with any or all of these items if he disagrees. Rule 2.1.4
needs to be deleted. The annual dues will not be very high and theoretically
some
other class could have its members buy 50 memberships and gain control of our
class without ever owning a boat. Only boat owners should be allowed to
vote. Rule 3.1a needs to have language included that makes clear the need to be
licensed prior to bonding of the hull and deck. This should replace the (but
prior to completion) clause. This subject was brought up in conjunction with
the request by some DN sailors that I met with in Frankfort Michigan. It
becomes an issue because we want to get a couple of CNC shops certified to make
stations, bulkheads, transoms and other misc. for sail to those who want to
move
to completion quickly. Each such shop will need to pay the costs of
certification that the end product is exactly the same as the originals that
everyone
now has. I'm not going to spend any time arguing with CNC people as the very
first attempt substantiated the need for this certification. Initially, I
refused to engage in this process as the owner of the design. I felt that the
loss
of control would likely lead to a lot of bootlegged stations. This was one
of the reasons for the âphotoâ requirement. VMG Skiffs in Frankfort will
be
the first to have this certification (in addition to their builder
certification). They are paying my expenses to come to their facility in
January to
complete the process. We should try to get at least one European and one
Australian company to provide the same services. To be fair, we will calculate
the
costs associated with the VMG experience and charge them the same amount (plus
a
couple of pints). Rule 4.2 Verbiage needs to be added that the bulkheads must
comply with the instructions in the construction manual. (this verbiage is
included in 5.12.7 b but needs the photo requirement in big letters here to
make
sure that nobody inadvertently forgets). This change is needed to keep
the bulkheads uniform throughout the class.run: yes"> A photo showing the
bulkheads filleted in place needs to be part of that language (the other reason
for
the photos). The need for this photo was discovered at VMG Skiffs as we were
going over the locations for the additional forward ports. Language also
needs to be added hear that makes clear the need to provide the photos and pay
the fee prior to bonding the hull and deck (boats completed without doing so
will not be allowed into the class). It is true that someone could fillet all
of
the bulkheads in place and then grind them back out and replace them with
some other configuration. It is also true that someone could build the entire
boat, get it measured, cut the hull off of the deck, replace the bulkheads with
something illegal and re-bond the deck. I'm not terribly worried about either
of these happening. The likelihood that the class will be able to afford a
flexible scope type of camera sometime in the future should deter anyone that
devious. Rule 4.7.2 This rule needs some more discussion. This could be
something really unique about our class but it could also be something that
causes
people to use duct tape to comply because of cost. If we want this rule we
should investigate the cost and provided members with the location where they
can
get it done. I would suggest that we establish a reasonable per boat budget
and if we cannot get it done within that budget, we scrap the idea. It may be
that we can negotiate with Ronstan or someone to foot the bill for placing
their logo over 15% of the area. This needs work. The class needs to let me
know how to proceed. Rule 5.5 and 5.6 needs a little cleanup in language. This
now implies that I can't put a tape measure on my own boat. Yes, I agree that
I'm being paranoid but imagine someone new to sailing reading this rule. Rule
5.12.4 needs to have the words âperpendicular to the centerlineâ deleted
and
a provision for a third hole for the lowers to attach perhaps by stating that
all three shroud attachment holes must be between 76 Ââ and 77 Ââ Rule
5.13.3b needs to have âshall exceed 60mmâ changed to 75mm Rule 5.13.6c
needs to
have any sectional limitation removed ew Roman" size=3>Rule 5.13.6 e should
include language informing builders how to get the needed information. Best
regards, Bram
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <swiftsolo-return-106-Harveynestor=wmconnect.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from rly-xn05.mx.aol.com (rly-xn05.mail.aol.com [172.20.83.138])
by air-xn03.mail.aol.com (v97.10) with ESMTP id MAILINXN31-64b3fc2f456114; Tue,
25 Nov 2003 01:19:15 -0500
Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [168.75.98.6]) by
rly-xn05.mx.aol.com (v97.10) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXN51-64b3fc2f456114; Tue,
25 Nov 2003 01:19:03 -0500
Received: (qmail 7135 invoked by uid 636); 25 Nov 2003 06:18:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact swiftsolo-help@xxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Help: <mailto:swiftsolo-help@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:swiftsolo-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:swiftsolo-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-To: mailing list swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Received: (qmail 7123 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2003 06:18:48 -0000
From: BDally6107@xxxxxxx
Message-ID: <127.355a4883.2cf44e3c@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 01:18:36 EST
Subject: proposed changes to the rules
To: swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="-----------------------------1069741116"
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5002
X-AOL-IP: 168.75.98.6
X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:XXX:XX
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0
Subj: rules changes
Date: 11/25/2003 12:30:36 PM Central Standard Time
From: BDally6107@xxxxxxx
To: swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sorry for so many emails regarding rules but we are getting close. I created
some confusion with my list yesterday in that the first change is for section
A and the other for section B.
We are getting close and should be able to turn out the final proposed copy
for a vote tomorrow. We may have a couple of final changes this afternoon.
Best regards,
Bram
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <swiftsolo-return-111-Harveynestor=wmconnect.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from rly-xi06.mx.aol.com (rly-xi06.mail.aol.com [172.20.116.12])
by air-xi02.mail.aol.com (v97.10) with ESMTP id MAILINXI23-7193fc39fb03bc; Tue,
25 Nov 2003 13:30:35 -0500
Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [168.75.98.6]) by
rly-xi06.mx.aol.com (v97.10) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXI63-7193fc39fb03bc; Tue,
25 Nov 2003 13:30:08 -0500
Received: (qmail 15429 invoked by uid 636); 25 Nov 2003 18:29:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact swiftsolo-help@xxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Help: <mailto:swiftsolo-help@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:swiftsolo-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:swiftsolo-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-To: mailing list swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Received: (qmail 15417 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2003 18:29:47 -0000
From: BDally6107@xxxxxxx
Message-ID: <115.2bf118ef.2cf4f997@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 13:29:43 EST
Subject: rules changes
To: swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="-----------------------------1069784983"
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5002
X-AOL-IP: 168.75.98.6
X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:XXX:XX
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0
Bram:
Maybe I missed an e-mail yesterday concerning the rules, but I did get
one e-mail from you today that lists changes to Rule 2.1.4, Rule 3.1a, Rule
4.2, Rule 4.7.2, Rule 5.5 and 5.6, Rule 5.12.4, Rule 5.133.3b, and Rule 5.13.6c.
I have just received your attached e-mail regarding your list yesterday
that states "the first change is for section A and the other for section B."
So I take it there are only two changes contained in that e-mail. And,
if you do not mind my asking, What are they?
I am also attaching to this e-mail the other e-mail I received today and
to whcih I am referring. Please feel free to post your answer to this e-mail
so everyone can see it.
Thank you in advance.
Eldon
Subj: proposed changes to the rules
Date: 11/25/2003 12:19:15 AM Central Standard Time
From: BDally6107@xxxxxxx
To: swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Here are the guts of the rule changes and reasoning that I proposing. Actual
language needs to be finished. Remember, these are recommendations and
subject to debate. Because my voice is shot, I've not had the opportunity to
run
them by my normal sounding board (Greg Ryan). I know that I can count on Greg
to take issue with any or all of these items if he disagrees. Rule 2.1.4
needs to be deleted. The annual dues will not be very high and theoretically
some
other class could have its members buy 50 memberships and gain control of our
class without ever owning a boat. Only boat owners should be allowed to
vote. Rule 3.1a needs to have language included that makes clear the need to be
licensed prior to bonding of the hull and deck. This should replace the (but
prior to completion) clause. This subject was brought up in conjunction with
the request by some DN sailors that I met with in Frankfort Michigan. It
becomes an issue because we want to get a couple of CNC shops certified to make
stations, bulkheads, transoms and other misc. for sail to those who want to
move
to completion quickly. Each such shop will need to pay the costs of
certification that the end product is exactly the same as the originals that
everyone
now has. I'm not going to spend any time arguing with CNC people as the very
first attempt substantiated the need for this certification. Initially, I
refused to engage in this process as the owner of the design. I felt that the
loss
of control would likely lead to a lot of bootlegged stations. This was one
of the reasons for the âphotoâ requirement. VMG Skiffs in Frankfort will
be
the first to have this certification (in addition to their builder
certification). They are paying my expenses to come to their facility in
January to
complete the process. We should try to get at least one European and one
Australian company to provide the same services. To be fair, we will calculate
the
costs associated with the VMG experience and charge them the same amount (plus
a
couple of pints). Rule 4.2 Verbiage needs to be added that the bulkheads must
comply with the instructions in the construction manual. (this verbiage is
included in 5.12.7 b but needs the photo requirement in big letters here to
make
sure that nobody inadvertently forgets). This change is needed to keep
the bulkheads uniform throughout the class.run: yes"> A photo showing the
bulkheads filleted in place needs to be part of that language (the other reason
for
the photos). The need for this photo was discovered at VMG Skiffs as we were
going over the locations for the additional forward ports. Language also
needs to be added hear that makes clear the need to provide the photos and pay
the fee prior to bonding the hull and deck (boats completed without doing so
will not be allowed into the class). It is true that someone could fillet all
of
the bulkheads in place and then grind them back out and replace them with
some other configuration. It is also true that someone could build the entire
boat, get it measured, cut the hull off of the deck, replace the bulkheads with
something illegal and re-bond the deck. I'm not terribly worried about either
of these happening. The likelihood that the class will be able to afford a
flexible scope type of camera sometime in the future should deter anyone that
devious. Rule 4.7.2 This rule needs some more discussion. This could be
something really unique about our class but it could also be something that
causes
people to use duct tape to comply because of cost. If we want this rule we
should investigate the cost and provided members with the location where they
can
get it done. I would suggest that we establish a reasonable per boat budget
and if we cannot get it done within that budget, we scrap the idea. It may be
that we can negotiate with Ronstan or someone to foot the bill for placing
their logo over 15% of the area. This needs work. The class needs to let me
know how to proceed. Rule 5.5 and 5.6 needs a little cleanup in language. This
now implies that I can't put a tape measure on my own boat. Yes, I agree that
I'm being paranoid but imagine someone new to sailing reading this rule. Rule
5.12.4 needs to have the words âperpendicular to the centerlineâ deleted
and
a provision for a third hole for the lowers to attach perhaps by stating that
all three shroud attachment holes must be between 76 Ââ and 77 Ââ Rule
5.13.3b needs to have âshall exceed 60mmâ changed to 75mm Rule 5.13.6c
needs to
have any sectional limitation removed ew Roman" size=3>Rule 5.13.6 e should
include language informing builders how to get the needed information. Best
regards, Bram
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <swiftsolo-return-106-Harveynestor=wmconnect.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from rly-xn05.mx.aol.com (rly-xn05.mail.aol.com [172.20.83.138])
by air-xn03.mail.aol.com (v97.10) with ESMTP id MAILINXN31-64b3fc2f456114; Tue,
25 Nov 2003 01:19:15 -0500
Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [168.75.98.6]) by
rly-xn05.mx.aol.com (v97.10) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXN51-64b3fc2f456114; Tue,
25 Nov 2003 01:19:03 -0500
Received: (qmail 7135 invoked by uid 636); 25 Nov 2003 06:18:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact swiftsolo-help@xxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Help: <mailto:swiftsolo-help@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:swiftsolo-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:swiftsolo-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-To: mailing list swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Received: (qmail 7123 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2003 06:18:48 -0000
From: BDally6107@xxxxxxx
Message-ID: <127.355a4883.2cf44e3c@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 01:18:36 EST
Subject: proposed changes to the rules
To: swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="-----------------------------1069741116"
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5002
X-AOL-IP: 168.75.98.6
X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:XXX:XX
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0
Subj: rules changes
Date: 11/25/2003 12:30:36 PM Central Standard Time
From: BDally6107@xxxxxxx
To: swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sorry for so many emails regarding rules but we are getting close. I created
some confusion with my list yesterday in that the first change is for section
A and the other for section B.
We are getting close and should be able to turn out the final proposed copy
for a vote tomorrow. We may have a couple of final changes this afternoon.
Best regards,
Bram
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <swiftsolo-return-111-Harveynestor=wmconnect.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from rly-xi06.mx.aol.com (rly-xi06.mail.aol.com [172.20.116.12])
by air-xi02.mail.aol.com (v97.10) with ESMTP id MAILINXI23-7193fc39fb03bc; Tue,
25 Nov 2003 13:30:35 -0500
Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [168.75.98.6]) by
rly-xi06.mx.aol.com (v97.10) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXI63-7193fc39fb03bc; Tue,
25 Nov 2003 13:30:08 -0500
Received: (qmail 15429 invoked by uid 636); 25 Nov 2003 18:29:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact swiftsolo-help@xxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Help: <mailto:swiftsolo-help@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:swiftsolo-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:swiftsolo-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-To: mailing list swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Received: (qmail 15417 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2003 18:29:47 -0000
From: BDally6107@xxxxxxx
Message-ID: <115.2bf118ef.2cf4f997@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 13:29:43 EST
Subject: rules changes
To: swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="-----------------------------1069784983"
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5002
X-AOL-IP: 168.75.98.6
X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:XXX:XX
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0
|