CLOSED 2016 Rule Change -Limit De-tuning by electronic means

[pmk]

From where i sit, most of the changes that go into the rules are proposed or catalyzed by NASA members. You have that influence, but remember that not everyone posts here, particularly if they know that opinion would be unpopular. This forum and other electronic venue's only represent a small portion of the membership. I don't know how many people have raced GTS in the last several years, but I know that number exceeds 200 based on GTS Sticker purchases. How many regular contributors are there on this forum? 30 maybe?

 

So this forum isn't necessarily an accurate portrayal of the collective GTS opinion. To your point, I think a few well worded survey's would be valuable.

 

So I can't provide complete objective proof that you do have a say, but subjectively I see that you certainly do. You definitely do via your Series Directors based on my observation.

 

The problem is that if those concerns aren't made public and discussed, that is functionally indistinguishable (for the rest of us who don't have inside knowledge) from our voices being disregarded. And it also beggars belief that for every single rule change proposed, ALL of the "non-public" feedback regarding the rule contradicts all of the public feedback. If the rule changes are really so popular, people would have no reason to refrain from posting their opinions (and, indeed, there are some such posts on this year's rule proposals, although they were in a clear minority). We're being asked to accept - on faith, and in defiance of statistical likelihood - that "everyone else" really wants these rules. Can you really not understand why those folks who post here are skeptical?

[ILIKETODRIVE]

The problem is that if those concerns aren't made public and discussed, that is functionally indistinguishable (for the rest of us who don't have inside knowledge) from our voices being disregarded. And it also beggars belief that for every single rule change proposed, ALL of the "non-public" feedback regarding the rule contradicts all of the public feedback. If the rule changes are really so popular, people would have no reason to refrain from posting their opinions (and, indeed, there are some such posts on this year's rule proposals, although they were in a clear minority). We're being asked to accept - on faith, and in defiance of statistical likelihood - that "everyone else" really wants these rules. Can you really not understand why those folks who post here are skeptical?

This. If the non-forum voices are so loud they should make a point to be on here and present their case.