Was there this much controversy when SCCA switched
from sundials over to electronic timing :-) :-)
Craig
--- "John F. Kelly Jr." <76067.1750@compuserve.com>
wrote:
> -------------------- Begin Original Message
> --------------------
>
> Message text written by "Kevin Lahey"
>
> >>"In message
> <200111061640_MC3-E603-8FFA@compuserve.com>,
> >>"John F. Kelly Jr." writes:
> >>>As you continue your conversation and research
> you will realize the
> >>>resistance to this change relates to previous
> efforts to make it work.
> >>>Jerry's efforts were done in secret and then
> revealed.
>
> >>As the chief nay-sayer on any new project, John,
> you ought to think
> >>about what this means. If you had been consulted
> beforehand, perhaps
> >>those of us who *don't* live with the scorekeeper
> might still be waiting
> >>a week or two to get the results.
>
> "Nay-sayer"? Your name calling is inappropriate and
> not appreciated.
> Now that you've become inactive in the sport, at
> least the SCCA's branch of
> it, why are you taking up this forum?
>
> I've been in favor of spending what it takes to make
> the game more
> pleasureable.
> What I've laid out in the dialog is the hurdles that
> must be leaped over to
> make any computerized system work.
> Having been denied entry to a Divisional
> event in Sacramento about
> four-five years ago because "the computer is busy,"
> I don't want the game
> to lose being "user friendly."
> (We had just gotten our engine together the
> night before and
> decided to post-enter, there being no "drop dead"
> date printed anywhere.
> We'd just pay the late fee, or so we thought. At 8
> a.m. Saturday morning
> the computer was "busy" using the National results
> software and they
> didn't/wouldn't accept any more entries to the
> Divisional. We were allowed
> to run as a local event entrant.)
>
> For as long as I can remember, dating back
> to when the sport was
> operated by the NorCal Council, Championship reults
> had to be out within
> seven days. When the SFR program started the same
> rule was applied. With
> the advent of computers, we are seeing results
> posted electronically within
> one or two days. And we continue to mail results
> because lots of people
> want to see it on paper and many want the paper to
> treasure the memories.
> Many other sanctioning bodies across the
> U.S. produce results as
> quickly and I think that's terrific. Alas a few have
> some genuine flakes in
> charge and have gotten as much as five months
> behind.
>
> >>I'm not necessarily excited about pre-registration
> (I like the illusion
> >>that I can decide whether or not to run at the
> last minute), or
> >>computerizing everything (I think it is all too
> easy to make this
> >>harder, rather than easier).
>
> Stick with me, kid, and autocrossing will continue
> to be a fun game you can
> wake up and decide to enter on that very day. <G>
>
> >>Nevertheless, I encourage folks to explore it and
> see what we can do. It
> sounds like >>there are certainly plenty of folks
> who are enthused enough
> to come up with a proof of
> >> concept and try it out...
> >>Kevin
> >>kml@patheticgeek.net"
>
> That's what we're talking about, Kevin: The concept
> and the details that
> MUST be covered. Otherwise we're stuck with the
> existing "National"
> software that isn't user friendly unless you
> pre-entered two weeks ago.
>
> It's been my pleasure the past three years
> as the SFR Solo II
> scheduler to bring more events into the Bay Area. We
> are thriving. I'm
> going to continue next year as the scheduler and I
> hope we can do it again.
>
> --John Kelly
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com
|