285 replies to this topic

[Tom Hampton]

I may be missing something here, and am not going to go back and read 10 pages. 1. Would this not save a lot of $ for a lot of us? 2. Would this not bring some farther back in the field who are getting outspent on tires closer to the front? Again I do not see the negative here, please educate me.
Thanks

Based on the poll votes, the support FOR this idea is pretty lopsided. 

 

There's been a little bit of commentary saying this might ELEVATE costs at the regional level, because the more budget minded may cycle multiple sets of older tires during a weekend to eeek out every last bit of life from those sets.  This proposal would penalize that type of tire management. 

 

I'm a regional only racer (have been over in NASA, am considering SCCA, now, too), and its still pretty common to see folks sticker up deep into the field (including DFL) on Sunday.  I still like the idea of showing up for the weekend with your selected tires for regional racing, too.  By Sunday, I've qual'd and raced my way to a certain place in the field...and with this, I don't have to "worry" about someone 3 places back driving past just because they are on stickers. 

 

The other discussion that's occured is how this might be able to be cheated.  A little street justice for anyone found trying to cheat this should fix that pretty quick. 

[Tom Hampton]

for years guys like me, you,Steyn and others "are just outspending everyone to win"... We submit something to not allow anyone to do that and I don't understand the push back either.

Hence my signature....

[Bench Racer]

Done

[Tom Hampton]

While I DID go to crbscca and submit my letter...it feels one half-step less archaic than getting out my mechanical typewriter, neatly typing up a letter, putting it in an envelope, and getting a stamp to physically mail it to Topeka. 

 

I mean I'm glad I *can* submit something, and I'm glad I don't actually have to use the USPS.  But, why-o-why does it have to be this way?  If I'm expected to send letters to voice my vote it would be nice to know what needs voting.  Here's a crazy thought...why can't SCCA have a polling system based on your SCCA.com login that is populated with the proposals that have been submitted (such as this one). Seriously, it could be as simple as putting a copy of THIS forum software on SCCA's website, and moderating the "letters" topics. 

 

We get ZERO visibility into the proposals (unless it gets discussed here before being submitted) until they show up in a "minutes".  Then the answer is "we got ONE letter, apparently no one cares". 

 

Why cant we see the list of ALL submited letters to the CRB and filter / sort them by the submission fields?  Is there some mystical reason these are close-hold until they are discussed? 

 

ETA: What's really ironic?  I need to submit a letter to CRBSCCA to make such a proposal.  ugh.

[mellen]

 and its still pretty common to see folks sticker up deep into the field (including DFL) on Sunday.  I still like the idea of showing up for the weekend with your selected tires for regional racing, too.  By Sunday, I've qual'd and raced my way to a certain place in the field...and with this, I don't have to "worry" about someone 3 places back driving past just because they are on stickers. 

 

 

agree with this and hope this passes to stop it.

[Bench Racer]

While I DID go to crbscca and submit my letter...it feels one half-step less archaic than getting out my mechanical typewriter, neatly typing up a letter, putting it in an envelope, and getting a stamp to physically mail it to Englewood, Colorado. 

Back in the day of the typewriter.

[Tom Hampton]

Back in the day of the typewriter.

 
Your AGE is showing, Dewey.  

[Chris Lefferdink]

For a guy who is potentially calling for the heads of volunteers trying to help better this class I would have expected that you would have submitted a letter.  You have 8 posts in this thread alone but couldn't take 2 seconds to send in a letter..... Come on dude.

 

We have Jim's proposal and 3 additional letters.  Three......  

 

So, Kyle..... Instead of being an internet hero and threatening volunteers if you don't get your way, follow the process and submit a freakin letter.  

 

This forum while entertaining has ZERO bearing on decisions and official policy of the SMAC or CRB.  The only formal consideration is through the CRB letter system.

 

With 3 letters for a class with thousands of cars and only 11 races, it is hard for us to believe that this is a huge problem, without more input.

 

Personally, I like the concept and think it merits more discussion and input from members.  We have not made a formal decision on anything at this time as we only have 3 letters and are doing some logistical research. 

 

Everyone who has commented in this thread, please take 2 seconds and submit a letter.

 

Sean

 

And people wonder why participation is decreasing...

[Steve Scheifler]

Tom, do you read your SCCA email, or wait for the print version to be delivered by USPS? I ask because as I recall I recently responded to a poll of sorts by SCCA regarding the costs to implement a member voting system.

That aside, here's the real irony. Online discussions and polls aren't deemed relevant because they may not represent an accurate cross section of SM racing members, but imagine the alternative (of not so very long ago and in fact today for many classes and topics). A few buddies in one region with the same agenda quietly send in letters. Nobody else is even aware of their request so no opposing letters are sent and no public discussion occurs. The first anyone knows about it is if/when there's an abbreviated reference and recommendation in Fast Track.

Contrast that with what happens here and tell me which scenario provides the SMAC with better insight into the wishes of the class. The average Joe who comes here to learn and comment may not know that he should communicate with the SMAC through the less than obvious CRB path. "Official" or not, what he does know is that his representatives are out here and will read what he posts and if a clear majority, let alone an overwhelming one, feels the same way then he should be able to expect his representatives to at least go through the motions of getting it out there for feedback through official channels regardless of their individual opinions on the matter.

So I'll repeat, what's more reasonable to act on to at least the next step, a few letters out of the blue without any public discussion or what we have here even with just a few "official" letters? I hope that's rhetorical.

[Tom Hampton]

This forum while entertaining has ZERO bearing on decisions and official policy of the SMAC or CRB.  The only formal consideration is through the CRB letter system.
 
With 3 letters for a class with thousands of cars and only 11 races, it is hard for us to believe that this is a huge problem, without more input.
 
Personally, I like the concept and think it merits more discussion and input from members.  We have not made a formal decision on anything at this time as we only have 3 letters and are doing some logistical research. 
 
Everyone who has commented in this thread, please take 2 seconds and submit a letter.

 
"The only formal consideration is through the CRB letter system." 

 

That's just ABSURD.  If you and all the rest of the SMAC members didn't frequent this forum, I could understand that position (notwithstanding my other comments about the Letter Writing procedure itself, above).  But, it is the height of rediculousness to make the claim that "you don't know people care" on the thread where people are clearly expressing the fact that they CARE, and have VOTED 75 times (66 in favor). 

 

Its like sticking your fingers in your ears and going "la la la la la....I can't hear you!"  Well, sure...take your fingers out of your ears---errr read the thread, if you care to know what we've been discussing and thinking in relation to the letters that you have received.  And, if you want to discuss it with us....join in.  We literally have no where else to do that. 

 

 

"merits more discussion and input"

 

er...what do you think this 10 page thread is?  I think its DISCUSSION, and INPUT.  How else should we discuss it?  We can't see each other's letters on CRBSCCA, the forum software on SCCA is HORRIBLE, seriously!  So, here we are.  Do I need to submit a letter with a http link back to this thread, stating "please read this forum thread in its entirety."  Or sould I cut and paste the entire thing into 80 letters on CRBSCCA? 

 

I get that we shouldn't EXPECT you to read every thread on here.  And that the only way to ENSURE that you know about it is for us to submit a letter.  That's been done.  But, literally coming onto the thread where the topic is being discussed (11 pages no less, which is quite a lot around here these days), saying that you have received Jim's letter, but you have no way to guage "other support" is just being obtuse and pedantic. 

 

You have 66 affirmative votes on here.  And, you can see them as well as the rest of us.  Hell, you can even see exactly who voted which way, on which question.  How many letters do you need to consider this "strongly supported"? 

[Tom Hampton]

Tom, do you read your SCCA email, or wait for the print version to be delivered by USPS? I ask because as I recall I recently responded to a poll of sorts by SCCA regarding the costs to implement a member voting system.

....

So I'll repeat, what's more reasonable to act on to at least the next step, a few letters out of the blue without any public discussion or what we have here even with just a few "official" letters? I hope that's rhetorical.

SCCA email? I don't recall getting SCCA emails. But, I used my "junk" email address for SCCA...so, it might have been diluted by all the other spam that inbox gets.

I think my previous post makes it clear we are both on the same page.  Yes, the Spec Miata Racers forum isn't a valid cross section of the 1000s of SM racers.  But, 17 letters somehow is?  Got it. 

 

I think that's called Cherry Picking.

[Martinracing98]

I am going to ask the dumb question. How do I get a letter to them?

[Steve Scheifler]

I am going to ask the dumb question. How do I get a letter to them?

Thank you for proving my point:

https://www.crbscca.com/

[Tom Hampton]

More specifically:
 

pathetic If half the people who voted here in the poll sent in the shortest letter.. all of two minutes.. It would have been hard to ignore..

Very simple, I just did a sample letter to see how long it takes, literally less than 30 seconds

CRBSCCA.com

Prefilled box will pop up
a few arrow downs

choose the following:
club racing board

spec miata

Sm

Under "title" add : "tire limiting proposal"

request box add: "I support a problem that limits the number of tires used per weekend"

click submit, done!

[Tom Sager]

Back in the day of the typewriter.

[Sean - MiataCage]

Sean, I knew Jim sent a letter, we all voted here and well as it was posted on Facebook to catch more people into the conversation.

I have no idea what the process is the only time I have ever seen racers asked to send a crb letter is after the smac decides to be for a change.

Now that you are asking for a letter I am happy to write one as will many others.

The smac seems to be a secret society to me and maybe others that are not politically involved in the club.

I commend you for coming on here and posting what you have posted.

Will send a letter soon!

I am not demanding my way btw I am asking for it to go to the class to vote! If more then 50% voted against it then it should die whether I want it or not!

 

Thanks Kyle the letters are extremely helpful.

[Sean - MiataCage]

Sean, as you know I didn’t send a letter either. At this time we are not active participants in HST and only our loaner cars are active in the class. As such I still feel justified to comment publicly and be involved in the conversation, but not to the extent of a formal request to the CRB on this particular matter.

As for the rest, I’m surprised there weren’t more letters but I don’t buy the default excuse for SMAC to ignore something they don’t favor. Seriously, the interest in this is abundantly clear no matter the vehicle. Shall we enumerate the times over the years that SMAC has taken it upon themselves to recommend something with little or no public debate or input? As for “thousands” of cars, not in any one season and certainly not in HST, barely into hundreds. How about asking them? How about my suggestion to seek input with a form at registration, or at an impound-all? Too simple and old-school?

Sure, the caveman has been on this forum MORE than long enough to know the procedure and that SMAC is free to ignore anything they want without a flood of letters. Surely his handlers have read that to him more than once, but, he’s a caveman. A lot of people haven’t been around long but may be aware that when something is proposed it eventually goes out for member input. Seeing here that there is overwhelming support from those on the forum it isn’t unreasonable to assume that will eventually come, or at least that it won’t be killed without something more than an evening phone discussion amongst five guys. Again, plenty has been done without a letter campaign.

Thanks for stepping up to discuss it though, that is definitely appreciated.

Thanks Steve.... Let me see if I can respond to some of your points:

 

I understand your position.  The process however does not require you to be at a specific level of "active" other than an active membership, and I for one appreciate more feedback and thoughts/opinions than less, so please submit a letter on this and any other topic that can help improve SM.

 

As to my reference of 1000's of cars it was relative to all of SM not just HST.  Basically the general process of how rules are written, discussed and approved.

 

The way the SCCA works is via the letter system.  Right or wrong, that is the process that the SMAC has to work within.   We as SMAC members rarely submit letters unless it is a clarification type of issue and we would submit just to follow the process.   We can not just arbitrarily start making SM what we 5 think it should be, we have to respond to the community via the letter system.   Even if we agree or dis-agree with the letters and topic the decision is still up the the CRB, not us.  We have had a few things denied in recent months/years by the CRB for various reasons, so we are not the end all be all of the rules making process.

 

The interest being abundantly clear on an Internet forum is not how the SCCA process works.  If we had to start monitoring multiple forums and FB and responding to issues via those channels there really wouldn't be any time to get anything else done other than monitoring forums.  Which forums should we monitor?  How does a new forum get approved to be monitored? Does FB count?  The letter system is the easiest way to get a request across in a timely manner to the appropriate people and teams.

 

I don't know what specific items in the past you are referring to relative to no public debate or input, but I can tell you that when we do the WDYT asking for public input we get ridiculously low (single digit) response percentages compared to the number of active racers.  When some in the community scream "everyone wants this" and we get 45 people in the whole country to respond the lack of response does not back up the statement that "everyone wants this."

 

We are in the process of trying to get additional information from HST entrants.  WG is the last HST this year so we shall see what comes of that and proceed accordingly and potentially go backwards to all HST entrants from the 19 season for their opinions.  It's not that it's too simple, its that you have a club of mostly volunteers trying to find the time to get all the volunteering done and often don't have the bandwidth to add admiral requirements to a given weekend event and we don't have the budget to send someone specifically to obtain the information.

 

Nothing to my knowledge has been killed.  We meet once a month for a couple hours and will spend additional time and calls when necessary.

 

I think the biggest thing for me right now is that we need to be dealing with facts and not emotions.  I'm not pointing any fingers at anyone (especially you) I am just saying that your reference to something being killed is simply not true.  So now it's on an Internet forum and pitch forks are starting to come out regarding a decision that has not even been made or is even close to being made.   All I can tell you is that we are doing our due diligence to try and figure out how something like this proposal would work if it were to be adopted.

 

BTW, SMAC is the group that came up with this idea a while ago specifically as it relates to a potential new tire from Hoosier.  We discussed how to limit spending and how other series do it and how it might look in SCCA land.  SCCA was very willing to listen and offer suggestions on how they might be able to help.  Jim brought an interesting twist to the tire sticker idea not long ago so I asked him to submit the letter for formal consideration and he did.

 

I am going to answer a few more posts tonight and then probably not respond to much more.  Unfortunately I have a couple real jobs to pay the bills that I need to pay attention to, so I can't go back and forth on an Internet forum.   

 

If you want to call me to discuss, I am happy to discuss it with you or anyone else who has questions or concerns.

 

Thank you.... Sean

[Sean - MiataCage]

While I DID go to crbscca and submit my letter...it feels one half-step less archaic than getting out my mechanical typewriter, neatly typing up a letter, putting it in an envelope, and getting a stamp to physically mail it to Topeka. 

 

I mean I'm glad I *can* submit something, and I'm glad I don't actually have to use the USPS.  But, why-o-why does it have to be this way?  If I'm expected to send letters to voice my vote it would be nice to know what needs voting.  Here's a crazy thought...why can't SCCA have a polling system based on your SCCA.com login that is populated with the proposals that have been submitted (such as this one). Seriously, it could be as simple as putting a copy of THIS forum software on SCCA's website, and moderating the "letters" topics. 

 

We get ZERO visibility into the proposals (unless it gets discussed here before being submitted) until they show up in a "minutes".  Then the answer is "we got ONE letter, apparently no one cares". 

 

Why cant we see the list of ALL submited letters to the CRB and filter / sort them by the submission fields?  Is there some mystical reason these are close-hold until they are discussed? 

 

ETA: What's really ironic?  I need to submit a letter to CRBSCCA to make such a proposal.  ugh.

 

Hi Tom.

 

The process normally would have been handled through a WDYT through Fastrack.  Jim chose to put out his proposal on FB and here on MR and that is how this 10 page thread started.  Under the normal process, when we were ready we would send out the WDYT.  If we were to try and send out the WDYT today we do not have enough logistical information both from a technology and procedural perspective to convey to you yet.   So most would likely say they needed more details.  We are working on figuring out those details and will likely send out a WDYT in the future.

 

I agree that there is no visibility into the letters and I also agree that maybe that isn't right.  I will get with SCCA and ask what issues there may be letting people see what letters are in the system for discussion.   I think the only way we could do this would be to remove who the letters came from as to not discourage letters from coming into the system.

 

I'm not saying you, but I know a lot of people think some of these decisions are super easy and don't require anyone else's input.  That is simply not true, we often have to deal with SCCA risk management, Mazda, tire manufacturers etc.  A lot of people don't think about the logistics of who a change impacts and how it would be implemented if approved.

 

I know that everyone on the SMAC has the cost to the general racer in mind and wants to limit those costs whether real or perceived.

 

I will save you the letter on this one and investigate what can be done.

 

Thanks.... Sean 

[Sean - MiataCage]

Tom, do you read your SCCA email, or wait for the print version to be delivered by USPS? I ask because as I recall I recently responded to a poll of sorts by SCCA regarding the costs to implement a member voting system.

That aside, here's the real irony. Online discussions and polls aren't deemed relevant because they may not represent an accurate cross section of SM racing members, but imagine the alternative (of not so very long ago and in fact today for many classes and topics). A few buddies in one region with the same agenda quietly send in letters. Nobody else is even aware of their request so no opposing letters are sent and no public discussion occurs. The first anyone knows about it is if/when there's an abbreviated reference and recommendation in Fast Track.

Contrast that with what happens here and tell me which scenario provides the SMAC with better insight into the wishes of the class. The average Joe who comes here to learn and comment may not know that he should communicate with the SMAC through the less than obvious CRB path. "Official" or not, what he does know is that his representatives are out here and will read what he posts and if a clear majority, let alone an overwhelming one, feels the same way then he should be able to expect his representatives to at least go through the motions of getting it out there for feedback through official channels regardless of their individual opinions on the matter.

So I'll repeat, what's more reasonable to act on to at least the next step, a few letters out of the blue without any public discussion or what we have here even with just a few "official" letters? I hope that's rhetorical.

 

Your assumption is that this was killed and that is not true.  We are fact finding at the moment and provided it is all possible we will likely send out a WDYT.    We are going through the motions.  You were fed inaccurate information.

[Sean - MiataCage]

 
"The only formal consideration is through the CRB letter system." 

 

That's just ABSURD.  If you and all the rest of the SMAC members didn't frequent this forum, I could understand that position (notwithstanding my other comments about the Letter Writing procedure itself, above).  But, it is the height of rediculousness to make the claim that "you don't know people care" on the thread where people are clearly expressing the fact that they CARE, and have VOTED 75 times (66 in favor). 

 

Its like sticking your fingers in your ears and going "la la la la la....I can't hear you!"  Well, sure...take your fingers out of your ears---errr read the thread, if you care to know what we've been discussing and thinking in relation to the letters that you have received.  And, if you want to discuss it with us....join in.  We literally have no where else to do that. 

 

 

"merits more discussion and input"

 

er...what do you think this 10 page thread is?  I think its DISCUSSION, and INPUT.  How else should we discuss it?  We can't see each other's letters on CRBSCCA, the forum software on SCCA is HORRIBLE, seriously!  So, here we are.  Do I need to submit a letter with a http link back to this thread, stating "please read this forum thread in its entirety."  Or sould I cut and paste the entire thing into 80 letters on CRBSCCA? 

 

I get that we shouldn't EXPECT you to read every thread on here.  And that the only way to ENSURE that you know about it is for us to submit a letter.  That's been done.  But, literally coming onto the thread where the topic is being discussed (11 pages no less, which is quite a lot around here these days), saying that you have received Jim's letter, but you have no way to guage "other support" is just being obtuse and pedantic. 

 

You have 66 affirmative votes on here.  And, you can see them as well as the rest of us.  Hell, you can even see exactly who voted which way, on which question.  How many letters do you need to consider this "strongly supported"? 

Hi Tom,

 

Don't hate the players, hate the game.  It is SCCA's process.  SMAC can not change that.  

 

I don't frequent this forum, I don't have time.  

 

I'm not being obtuse about it (love the Shawshank reference) , it is the only way SCCA formally acknowledges the letters.  Remember this has to be sent up to the CRB for approval.  They will not accept that "lots of people are in agreement on an Internet forum".   You and I have both spent way more time today typing on this forum than it takes to write a letter.  I agree that there might be better ways, but SMAC nor I are in charge of that or much less any other process.

 

As far as the discussion and input comments, you guys have jumped the gun.  You will likely be asked through a WDYT for your comments and input.   You would not have known about this until we were ready for you to know about it.  Jim posted it publicly, I am not saying that is right or wrong on his part I am just saying that if you let the process run its course you would be being asked through the formal process for your input and thoughts.

 

Supposedly there are over 3000 active SpecMiata's in the country between the multiple sanctioning bodies.   77 votes on one forum relative to 3000+ cars is not overwhelming or an accurate representation of the whole community.  For what its worth I have received quite a few calls and e-mails and personal conversations in person of people who do not like this proposal but do not want to post publicly about it for various reasons.  Half the people still think we are talking about this for regionals.

 

In my opinion, the only question that should be asked at this time is..... Are you in favor of a tire limiting rule for Hoosier Super Tour Races?  That's it.... If people think yes, then we need to go do some work on process and logistics and start asking more questions. 

 

Thanks.... Sean