I plead guilty as charged! (of inventing ideas for others to implement)
Would it slow things down if each person working registration had a hardcopy
list of the last event's participants and could look up the name of the
person registering to see if he had a DNW?
Incidentally, my experience attending events periodically over the years is
the opposite -- when I go to events I find it more interesting to work
multiple assignments and see/learn what is going on, rather that sit on my
duff or twiddle my thumbs, and I always see a lot of people who are doing
the same thing (working multiple assignments). These are the same people
I've seen off and on over the past 5 years. It always seemed to be the
culture of the SFR SCCA that people try to make themselves useful and help
out during the course of the day's event. I'm surprised to hear that there
is a problem with DNWs.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net
[mailto:owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Pat Kelly
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 14:57
To: Michael R. Clements; jesvilla@gte.net; cheryl grantz
Cc: ba autocross list
Subject: Re: More DNWs
Aaah, Michael, it is YOUR assignment. Now that you've accepted it, I'm sure
you can figure out a way. :) :) (please note the smiles!!)
--Pat K
----------
>From: "Michael R. Clements" <mrclem@telocity.com>
>To: "Pat Kelly" <lollipop487@home.com>, <jesvilla@gte.net>, "Cheryl Grantz"
<sgrantz@peoplepc.com>
>Cc: "ba autocross list" <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
>Subject: RE: More DNWs
>Date: Thu, Nov 1, 2001, 3:01 PM
>
>If somebody gets a DNW at an event, perhaps we could mark their name so
>if/when they show up at the next event, they have to work twice to avoid
>another DNW. I think this would be a firm way to get the point across
>without blacklisting, taking cards or other nastiness. Anybody who got a
DNW
>by honest mistake should be happy to "make it up" with extra work at the
>next event, and it might increase the number of available workers.
>
>Like any idea, it will work only if it's easy to keep track of. I have no
>idea how easy or hard this would be to keep track of, just seemed like an
>easy and fair thing to do.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net
>[mailto:owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Pat Kelly
>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 13:54
>To: jesvilla@gte.net; Cheryl Grantz
>Cc: ba autocross list
>Subject: Re: More DNWs
>
>
> When this whole deal started, we simply gave no points or finishing
>position with a "DNW" by the name. For some it took a few of these before
it
>sank in. I can thing of some very well known drivers where it took 5 DNWs!
> Asking registraion to maintain a list to keep the bad apples out is not
>a good idea, as the folks who run change during run groups.
> Lately we've not been showing times, too (which we used to do, just
so's
>the offender would know where they could have finished had he/she worked.
>But we've drawn a harder line at present.
> Usually the offenders get the picture pretty quickly and do one of two
>things: 1) don't return; or 2) return and work. Either is okay with me.
> Another offense some do is to get their names checked off, and wander
>away. So you really have to be a cop to keep them going in the right
>direction. :)
>--Pat K
>----------
>>From: Jesus Villarreal <jesvilla@gte.net>
>>To: Cheryl Grantz <sgrantz@peoplepc.com>
>>Cc: ba autocross list <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
>>Subject: Re: More DNWs
>>Date: Thu, Nov 1, 2001, 1:45 PM
>>
>
>>Cheryl Grantz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> So every worker sheet was compared to the results to see if the lack of
>>> workers was due to some people not even signing up to work.
>>>
>>> Sherry
>>
>>People caught doing this should be penalized somehow. Maybe confiscating
>>their SCCA membership card at the next event they attend(we might not be
>>able to do that) or banning them for a year. I had a few doing this at
>>AAS events, it only took one warning of being banned for a year and they
>>didn't do it again. At least I haven't caught anyone doing it lately. If
>>they get mad and don't come back, so what, SCCA doesn't need bad apples.
>>Most good people will respond positively to a firm warning.
>>
>>Jesus
|