TP52s

I will stop calling you a liar when you admit your lies - it's that simple. As to IRC contact any one of the measures and they will come and Measure your boat - simple (in your area you may need to pick up travel costs etc). Strait talk? How are the lies, mistruths and fabricated facts you have posted here qualify as strait talk?

It's simple
1. Apologies publicly on this board for posting as facts what are in reality lies.
2. Admit that your knowledge on the RRS is lacking and seek help.
3. Write an email to the TP 52 class web site apologizing for your lies and misleading those who accepted your stories as truth.
4. Politely ask for help in understanding the reality of racing sailboats

After you do these things I will stop correcting your facts and highlighting your lies - hell I'll even try to help you learn a few things.

 

Frank:

I think that you and I (along with the other members of this forum) are all adamant about what we consider facts. Please, though, consider that you are the only one on your side. Clearly, enough people with dozens of years and degrees of combined experience find that you are a "liar" (Not a liar, in my opinion, merely misinformed), so open your mind to the fact that everything you thought you knew (at least about the Mac26 and TP52 and related topics where you were disputed) was incorrect.

 

All the Bylaw say is that RRO governs the "conduct" of the meeting, not the dutys of the board, or how long the board members term is. Therefore you are wrong again. Try reading the bylaws before you make wild statements.

Article VII: Meetings
Section 1. Robert's Rules of Order, Revised shall govern the conduct of all general
and special meetings

 

I think Frank is an outright liar on some topics, and sincere but substantially deluded on others.

 

http://www.byc.com/mack05/index.cfm

The only boats racing IRC in this race are boats doing the Southampton course. A Mac26 does not qualify for this course. In fact, the Mac 26 doesn't even qualify for the race at all. The shore course boats are racing PHRF. The slowest rated boat this year is a Bristol 27 in PHRF L @ 225. There is currently no need for the shore course boats to rate under IRC. Even clubs using IRC for beer can racing are using IRC primarily for the fast boats. Most clubs are keeping PHRF for the slower boats. The expense for the owner is currently not justified. Will cruising class boats rate under IRC in the future? Probably, but that is a long way off. So you can go ahead and have your boat measured for IRC this year (wait a minute, why the hell would you need to be measured? You don't need a endorsed cert.), but you would be better served to save your money and take some sailing lessons, because your Mac is going to be sailing under PHRF for a while.

And I will repeat that NO ONE is SCARED of IRC. Those who have to apply for a endorsed cert are probably not thrilled about the cost, but that is about it.

BTW...IRC is not taylor made to your boat. It's not tailor made to any boat. It is a handicap rule. The details of said rule are kept secret. That is it. You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

All the Bylaws say is that RRO governs the "conduct" of the meeting, not the dutys of the board, or how long the board members term is.

I am flattered by all the attention I am getting right now. Please do not let me be argumentative. I really do not intend to lie and best I can tell have not done so. But I do and have changed my mind on quite a few things while at SSSS. So if you think something I am to have said is wacky please email me
mighetto@eskimo.com to see what I meant or even if I said it at all. For example - I have never said the Mac26x is a race boat. These are Cruiser-Racers or Race Trainers and not race boats. Nonetheless they are fast. On RRO:

I was confused for quite a time that the Board Meetings are not conducted by Roberts Rules of Order. Only the General and Special Meetings. RRO is meant for groups larger than 12 and our Bylaws do not specify conduct at a Board Meeting. Within the Board Room the Board makes up its own rules of order (conduct) but it is always an instrumentality of the Membership.

This year's Board could choose to close the Board Meeting to visitors. Last Year's decided that any one who wanted to, Member or Non Member, could attend. This is just an example. This group has much freedom. It also has a right to protect itself and is expected to do so. Rules of Order = Rules of Conduct. This is how I view things. Am I lying? Good conduct comes from following the proper rules.

Therefore you are wrong again. Try reading the bylaws before you make wild statements.

Last year our Commodore tried very hard to get the Board Members to read the Bylaws. With out going into the reason, at almost every meeting she attended she gave the Board Members a homework assignment that involved reading the Bylaws. The action being contemplated involved a procedure that was well documented in the club records and I came to realize that there was some reason why the homework wasn't being completed. That reason being that the PHRF Director, who attended every Board Meeting, and the Past Commodore, who was a Past PHRF Director, did not want this procedure executed any time in the near future.

Because of this, I assure you, I have read the Bylaws many many times. To understand them you must also read RRO and not just RRO. but RRO Revised.

When you read that work there is an explanation as to why the word "year" is not to be used in well crafted Bylaws - as in the statement "The Secretary's term is two years." One reason is the very real possibility - when all officers have year defined terms with the same specified end date - of the organization being disolved accidentally (or on pupose by the devious) because of a botched election. By specifying just a end date in the Bylaws, if there is a botched election, the Officers are still in place and just serve another year. The other is that you do not want the Bylaws to be so restrictive that when you get an exceptional candidate who insists on a multiple year term or where it otherwise makes sense, as in the Secretery position at SSSS, you can not allow the Membership to vote on that.

I will note that mail in ballots for the election was something that appeared to be supported by The PHRF Director who attended every SSSS Board Meeting. I very stupidly read in the RRO that this is not allowed unless the Bylaws were specific about how the mail in or electronic voting would be conducted. Had I not been so correct, we would have mailed out a ballot in the last S-t-S of the year. In anycase US Sailing will be implementing mail in or electronic balloting and we who support this look forward to following what US Sailing comes up with. The best I was able to do this year on electon reform was get the Past Commodore to introduce to the membership that we have secrete ballot elections specified in the Bylaws. He incorrectly claimed that secret ballots could be waived. They can not be. RRO is very specific on this. Almost any rule of order can be waived but to wave secret ballots denighs the electoriate the opportunity of writing in a candidate.

Article VII: Meetings Section 1. Robert's Rules of Order, Revised shall govern the conduct of all general and special meetings

Special Meetings - e gad. Lets not go there. There are parliamentarians that one can hire. I am not such a person. Perhaps one will speak up. In anycase if you can read the Rules of Racing you can read RRO. Both can be ignored as well.

 

The only boats racing IRC in this race are boats doing the Southampton course. A Mac26 does not qualify for this course. In fact, the Mac 26 doesn't even qualify for the race at all. The shore course boats are racing PHRF. The slowest rated boat this year is a Bristol 27 in PHRF L @ 225. There is currently no need for the shore course boats to rate under IRC. Even clubs using IRC for beer can racing are using IRC primarily for the fast boats. Itclubs are keeping PHRF for the slower boats. The expense for the owner is currently not justified. Will cruising class boats rate under IRC in the future? Probably, but that is a long way off. So you can go ahead and have your boat measured for IRC this year (wait a minute, why the hell would you need to be measured? You don't need a endorsed cert.), but you would be better served to save your money and take some sailing lessons, because your Mac is going to be sailing under PHRF for a while.

Great Information. The Mac26 doesn't quilify for the Sydney Hobart or the Transpac either. However, I am confident that the 1/2 size TP52s are targeted for those races. The restriction is on size, with 30 foot being the mininum. Since 1/2 sized TP52s are 26 foot, removal of the restrictions probably is in the works. I thought there was a similar restriction on the VanIsle 360 but a MiniTransat did most of the race this year. These are only 22 foot. It is a new age. The West Marine Transpac allows water ballasted vessels of as small as 24 foot. The 30 foot restriction is an artifact of that 1930s Transpac race involving Common Sense. The techology has vastly improved since then.

Best I can tell IRC is meant for the newer design vessels, specifically those not restricted to fixed foils and ballast. If your boat was designed during the last 10 years it probably should be part of IRC. Barry Carrol indicated that IRC favors cruiser racers over racers so factor that in as well. If you have a Hunter, Catalina, Magregor, things start getting exciting. On PHRF,

You can not believe the objections to PHRF that I got last Friday at the Corinthian Yacht Club. One sailor advocated completely rejecting the system because it wasn't in anyway related to competitive sailing. For there to be competitive sailing there must be fair processes. He had been denighed a rating change earlier and pointed out to me that something I had come to believe as fair (the different ratings by different regional locations) really was not. The rational for different ratings for the same boat in a different region is that local weather and sea conditions vary by regon. This makes sence until some one who has sailed in many regons says as Barry did to me that

"Every club tells me, but you do not understand, here we get light air AND chop."

My only objection to PHRF has been to the arbitrary way that a vessel is rated when the owners decide to retract foils during a race. It is arbitrary because the same hit on the rating is given regardless of the type of vessel.

It would be better to let the fixed keel boat owners lodge protests when it is obvious that foil retraction makes that much a difference and do this on a case by case basis.

And I will repeat that NO ONE is SCARED of IRC. Those who have to apply for a endorsed cert are probably not thrilled about the cost, but that is about it.

I disagree. IRC makes the hair stand up on the backs of those who have vested interest in PHRF. With a different rating system now supported by US Sailing you open the door to a different protest committee. A protest comittee for the IRC boats and a separate protest commitee for the PHRF boats. The protests could be on the Racing Rules of Sailing as well as protests involving ratings.

BTW...IRC is not taylor made to your boat. It's not tailor made to any boat. It is a handicap rule. The details of said rule are kept secret. That is it. You have no idea what you are talking about.

I raised the possibility of having an IRC performance sailing seminar, shortly after the disasterous for TP52 owners big boat event in San Francisco. This was the proving ground for IRC - the first IRC race in the US. It was suppose to be the showcase for TP52s. They even had video teams there to capture the victorious introdution of the TP52s to the west coast. What a joke.

Anyway, the suggestion of a seminar on IRC was met with disbelieve that it would even be proposed, followed by denial that it existed, then followed by well perhaps in a few years.

You have vocalized the latest argument against change that being cost. Unless you are working for a class rating, as I am for the Mac26x, the measurement I believe can be owner submitted. That is probably what you were getting to. There is still the initial cost but the yearly update cost is less than that and the more IRC boats rated then likely the less that yearly cost will be owing to economies of scale. There is no reason that the yearly cost need be any higher than PHRF, I suspect.

One great thing about anything new is that there are few experts. Hence becoming an expert on that new thing is relatively easy. The IRC material is currently being contemplated by the owner of the Pearl, the mac26m out of Lake union that has been extensively modified for racing. If you go to US Sailing's site and search on IRC you will get a lot of material. Thats what I am doing. That and distributing IRC materials provided to me by Mr Carrol. One way to deal with fear of change is education. Perhaps PHRF will be the rating system for boats launched prior to 1990 and IRC for the newer monohulls. Perhaps the race story is better told with multiple rating systems. This is what our prior Race Chair decided last year and there was extensive work done by a former PHRF Director and several Members over coffee's last year to come up with an alternative rating mechanism to PHRF. I see that work now as a stall tactic.

 

Great Information. The Mac26 doesn't quilify for the Sydney Hobart or the Transpac either.

No, and it never will. Good judgement on their part.

Best I can tell IRC is meant for the newer design vessels, specifically those not restricted to fixed foils and ballast. If your boat was designed during the last 10 years it probably should be part of IRC. Barry Carrol indicated that IRC favors cruiser racers over racers so factor that in as well. If you have a Hunter, Catalina, Magregor, things start getting exciting.


IRC is not "meant" for any particular design. Some boats may do better than others under IRC. It is like that with ANY rule. IRC is not some magical way of the future. It is simply another rule.

Nothing makes the above boats exiting. They are cruising boats. That is all. None of them are manufacturers of "cruiser/racers". Yes some people race them, however, most owners of these boats do not. They are usually more concerned with firing up the blender for margaritas.

You can not believe the objections to PHRF that I got last Friday at the Corinthian Yacht Club.

I'm sure the objections were to you and not the discussion of a rating.


My only objection to PHRF has been to the arbitrary way that a vessel is rated when the owners decide to retract foils during a race. It is arbitrary because the same hit on the rating is given regardless of the type of vessel.

You truly have no idea what you're talking about.


It would be better to let the fixed keel boat owners lodge protests when it is obvious that foil retraction makes that much a difference and do this on a case by case basis.


I'm not even going to discuss this bit of lunacy.


I disagree. IRC makes the hair stand up on the backs of those who have vested interest in PHRF. With a different rating system now supported by US Sailing you open the door to a different protest committee.


I'll say again...IRC doesn't scare anyone. It is simply another rule. It may not be for every club. Many small local clubs will likely remain PHRF. There is no vast conspiracy Frank, just your own ignorance.


Anyway, the suggestion of a seminar on IRC was met with disbelieve that it would even be proposed, followed by denial that it existed, then followed by well perhaps in a few years.



That's odd, there have been several of these seminars in my neck of the woods. Maybe you're just looking in the wrong place. SSSS is not the center of the sailing universe.


One great thing about anything new is that there are few experts.

There are many people that are very knowledgable about IRC. You are not one of them. It is not a new rule. It has been used in Europe for many years. BTW..It will cost more than PHRF. If you dissagree with the costs, contact the RORC, they own the rule.




Perhaps PHRF will be the rating system for boats launched prior to 1990 and IRC for the newer monohulls.



No, that would make zero sense. There are many older boats that will do very well under IRC. GL 70's, Many of the Jboat line, N/M 43's, Farr 40's, Farr 395's, older Bene's, etc. All of these boats will race and be competitive under IRC. The boat I routinely race on (Dehler DB1) was built in 1982. We currently and will continue to race under PHRF. It will be rated under IRC when we do the Bayview Mac race next year with it. That is the only race we will be doing under IRC next year. Our hair is not standing on end. We are looking forward to it.

 

"A protest comittee for the IRC boats and a separate protest commitee for the PHRF boats. The protests could be on the Racing Rules of Sailing as well as protests involving ratings. "

- Never happen that's not the way it works, protest committees are separate from rating systems.

"I raised the possibility of having an IRC performance sailing seminar, shortly after the disasterous for TP52 owners big boat event in San Francisco. This was the proving ground for IRC - the first IRC race in the US. It was suppose to be the showcase for TP52s. They even had video teams there to capture the victorious introdution of the TP52s to the west coast. What a joke."

- What part of it was disastrous? It was a great regatta, especially in the TP 52 class. What was a joke, the tight box rule racing? The high speed down wind legs (25+ KTS)? The fact that several new boats where ordered after the BBS?

 

i think frank is the only one on the planet who believes the Tp 52's and IRC are a bad thing.

 

"The high speed down wind legs (25+ KTS)?" That sounds AWESOME!

 

What a tool, so voted out of office but you refuse to recognize it claiming you are still secretary and equivalent to president, even though under Robert's Rules the order of progression does not place the secretary as anything but administrative. Then when someone says you threatened them, which we have done to me also in this thread, you respond by saying no you didn't "but they better do what you want or else". Got a clue for you that IS and veiled threat.

Obviously you are a student of Dale Carnegie.

 

It must be killing Frank to see 3 generations of TP 52's running close together and doing so well. Not a single Mac 26 in sight - O' wait thats because they do not meet the saftey requirements ....

 

Obviously you are a student of Dale Carnegie.

What? I do send my crew to Dale Carnegie. Oh - this was standard at Arther Anderson. Did you see how my old firm beat the rap on appeal? Well still guilty, I know that. Shred the evidence - that is the old boy way. Influence from the top down. Ebbers - 25 years. Sarb-Ox. See things can get better.

What a tool, so voted out of office but you refuse to recognize it claiming you are still secretary and equivalent to president, even though under Robert's Rules the order of progression does not place the secretary as anything but administrative.

RRO makes the Secretary equivalent in both power and authority to the Commodore. I was well aware that our past commodor and past PHRF board member did not respect the office of the Secretary. I also strongly believe he chose to disrespect the office and ignore RRO just as he likely ignores the Racing Rules of Sailing. There will be more protests against the F-80. Balder likely didn't lodge the first either. The joke is that the man will do any thing he wants. We recognize that behavior as the behavior of a hasbeen.

Anyway Skinny Boy.

RRO is based on the notion that once a thing is done it takes more effort to undo it. Under RRO an election meant to oust the incumbant before the end of his term isn't allowed because that undo doesn't take more effort. We have very specific procedures for removing a board member. Before it can even be discussed by fellow board members there must be a petition from the membership (20 percent signing). Owing to my arch rival Tripp Gal, PHRF rater - opposed to water ballast or at least Mac26x vessels, the discussion took place anyway. I wasn't there but I suspect it was initiated by PHRF board members or past board members. In any case - it failed. I like to think this was owing to several other board members who use to own MacGregors, The race chair and the Commodor, but who knows. In any case such is the power of the Society. I remember distintly our glee at discovering that SSSS would have the largest PHRF fleet in the Pacific Northwest if membership continued and the correction by a PHRF board member that this was not an indication of success by the Society but failure by other clubs. It is clear now that IRC is so welcome at CYC Seattle because Tripp Gal and her big boat ways are not. She really has done PHRF-NW damage. Her resignation as a rater would do much to restore the organization - to which I belong, of course and intend to become more active in.

Add PHRF to SSSS and US Sailing as organizations to which I am now a perpetual write-in candidate. Does PHRF have elections? I suspect not, but US Sailing will put presures to correct that.

Then when someone says you threatened them, which we have done to me also in this thread, you respond by saying no you didn't "but they better do what you want or else". Got a clue for you that IS and veiled threat.

I said that? I doubt it. I did offer to buy you a drink at Lake Fair - but you were unwilling to provide ID showing that you were 21. Now I get to tell you about the past commodore, past phrf adminstrator when he was Commodore. Not only did he have me elected to the two year term of Secretary, a term that does not expire until June 2006, but he also neglected to send dues reminder notices to those deamed unworthy who had not yet paid dues. One of those fellows took home the Uncle Juicy this year. He was real unworthy - yea right. We are so much better off without that fun loving fellow anywhere in charge

Now please - look up rule 14. I am tired of having to alter course to avoid colliding with these old matters. I do not intend to make waves of this. But of course I will chat about it as much as you want. It is my way and I am running for office

 

And you wonder why they voted you out of office. You are a disgrace to any organization. You disparage people. You are mean spirited and you try to be an Internet bully. Once again, before you bring out the tired old Internet Terrorism Act, post the verbage that shows your claim. You have violated copyright and intellectual property rights on this board as well as other places. You have violated professional codes of ethics for computer professionals of which you claim to be one. You have called all your fellow lub members and officers cowards and claimed they have violated the by-laws of their organizations all without proof of any kind.

Why don't you post the part of the by-laws that says it takes 20%. How about the part that says the organization is governed under RRO.

I can post the specifics of the ethics violations:
1.8: Certified computing professionals have a responsibility to respect intellectual property rights, including copyrights, patents and trademarks. Violation of copyrights, patents and terms of license agreements is prohibited by law in most circumstances. Even when not so protected, such violations are contrary to professional behavior. Software should be copied only with proper authorization. Unauthorized duplication of both printed and electronic materials must be discouraged including those cases where the work has not been explicitly protected by any means. Credit should not be taken for the work of others. The work of others should not be used without specific acknowledgment and authorization.

3.2: Personal Conduct: Insofar as one's personal and professional activities interact visibly to the same public, one is expected to support, respect and abide by the appropriate laws and in general to apply the same high standards of behavior in one's personal life as are demanded in one's professional activities.

I think it is time for you to apologize to everyone you have attacked and refrain from further personal attacks.