Sean,
In the past my style has been to bludgeon people to death with constant rebuttals. I am moving away from that with a new mantra of stating my case, providing one rebuttal if necessary, and then allow people to do whatever it is they want. In that spirit, here is my last comment on the subject before I go about prepping my program for this year without regard to this stuff.
1. Your item one is the same thing I think I am saying. But if you think it worth it for everyone to provide mid pack warm fuzzies about the front guys, I disagree. That in no way is a statement that I don't believe the front is dong some great rule exploitation. They are and you and I know it. But again, I no longer call that cheating. They are doing their job as a racer to develop their car to the cutting edge.
2. In your 2nd point this is flat out cheating and goes against your point one. But I don't believe for a moment that the front guys are doing the things you mentioned in this point. A hogged out restrictor will eventually be caught as the front guys are often checked for this. However I acknowledge your frustration in even the simple things are not being checked. In two years of competing in SM I have been asked to show my plate exactly once. And in that case they only wanted to verify the color and didn't have me pull the plate.
3. Of course the leaders don't want to give out secrets and nor should they. I am not looking for a library of cheats to show the world how to do it. I am saying that a creative compliance program that matches the creativity of the racers could be useful in car development. And that infractions leading to a DQ should be opened for all to understand so that they are not DQed in the future for the same infraction. And if Tech starts actively looking for these creative solutions then the competitor that is checked will learn about it in tech, not through a library of cheats or forcing teams to divulge secrets.
I was very careful in the language I used in describing infractions. I think the term cheating in our sport is the wrong word. And BTW, I want to acknowledge that I have evolved in this viewpoint and therefore some of my previous posts may not be congruent with my new view. Again, don't get me wrong. This in no way is saying that there isn't flat out cheating going on.
In regards to the 3 people in the world that understand the intent of the rules. I disagree. Everyone knows the intent of the rules. The intent is to provide a fair and level playing field. The purpose of the rule that says you can't unless we say you can is a way to allow those 3 people from having to write a rule book that is quite a bit bigger than it is. What I am suggesting is an attitude change. One that doesn't demonize guys that are looking to develop their cars to the very edge without us having to go to a power points based system that is even easier to manipulate. One that rewards guys like me that spend much time on keeping their cars as free as possible and that are willing to go through their gear before every weekend ensuring that it is rolling free and easy. I am suggesting something that is more along the lines of the attitude in F1. The rules are there, now smart people, go out and push them to the limit. If we find something we don't like, then we clarify in the rules and develop the rules like we develop cars. There is very little work by these three people to look at a DQ and to place in the book language that either allows it or disqualifies it. The hard work is trying to envision everything a creative team can think of to optimize their car in advance of writing the rule book. That is an impossible task. Teams in F1 aren't demonized for their exploitation. They are honored for their ingenuity and I consider it a high compliment if a rule is created to prevent an idea I had that takes advantage of what you will allow me. As Mike Collins is known to say, " their is no rule that says you can't be smarter than me". So let guys be smarter than their rivals until such a time that it is noticed and addressed and then the field is reset with that advantage nullified. It rewards them for a time for their creativity. Kinda like a patent, you get it for awhile but then you have to compete again.
I really don't care if the midpack is teched at the same level of the front. Go for it. I want to run at the front. So if you want to spend tech time and effort in the midpack that isn't going to be challenging us, not a problem with me. All that means is that I will be able to continue with my creative solution patent for a longer period of time. What I care about is that there is really no guide for a small grassroots org like mine to figure out how to develop a car without spending my track budget at a major garage that is also fielding my competitors cars. Don't get me wrong about that last statement. These garages have a right to make money and charge for their expertise and knowledge. But that extra 30% that they make in profit could be going into my track program if I am willing to spend the time to turn the wrench myself and to spend the time coming up to speed. I don't begrudge that it is taking us two years to get to the point where we are semi competitive. I didn't have 100K to drop into a garage to have a race winning car out of the shoot, and quite frankly even if I did we still would have spent two years learning the racecraft side of the house. All I want is a reasonable shot of being that grassroots underdog story of winning against all the powerhouse teams that are favored to kick my butt. I want my hard work and devotion to the sport to give me a leveling edge against money. I know it isn't fair to abandon tech for the midpack. And I am not suggesting that you do abandon tech for the midpack. But as others have pointed out, not everyone wants to compete at the front and engage in an intrusive compliance program that is needed at the front. So do weights and plates for all, include them in random intrusive tech but maybe only suspend podium winners for not complying with a an intrusive tech request. Allow midpack guys to say that they don't even know how to take the head off and rebuild it without spending a lot of money having a garage do it. Allow them to have their results nullified. If what you say is true and their are some guys that just want to come out and race, then they won't care if their 20th place is relegated to the back for failing to comply with an intrusive tech request. Only guys that do care about climbing the order will care about a relegation. But to say that we are going to suspend you for 6 months for not complying doesn't account for the difference in teams, talent, and differing objectives for racing by the people up and down the order. Leave the suspension rule in place for the top 5 positions, or the podium. But we can be smart enough to develop the class to a professional level while addressing concerns of the weekend racer. At least that is what I was raised to believe about American ingenuity.