Why do you need to be at the next meeting? New time,new day and a new venue.If that isn't enough reason how about coming out to make an informed vote on "the link"?What is required is an in meeting vote on whether to allow aftermarket rear suspension linkages in Super Sport classes. What does this mean?Two opposing views.To editorialize, group one wants to allow aftermarket linkages as a safety issue.Group two opposes allowing linkages in Super Sport,considering a link a performance item. "Why should I care?" Why vote? This is a bigger issue than just whether to allow links. It is ABOUT the shape and form of our SUPER SPORT RULES,THE PROCEDURE AND POLICY OF IMPLEMENTING RULE CHANGES and HOW OUR club and CLUBS RULES ALIGN WITH OTHER race ORGANIZATIONS. To allow an informed vote the pro faction will make a presentation stating the benefits.The floor will then be opened up for questions and rebuttals followed by a vote to settle the issue. So do some research, bring an open mind and exercise your right to vote.
Is this a special resolution vote? We are talking after all, about fundamental changes to supersport rules.
In my opinion, this isn't about "fundamental changes" to the supersport rules. The supersport rules already allow certain aftermarket parts to be used like bodywork, headers, up to 1mm overbore, thinner head gaskets, master cylinders, etc. If our supersport rules allowed NO aftermarket parts whatsoever, then this could be considered a change to the fundamentals. As it is, this is a vote to allow an aftermarket part or not, and if this part gives a competitive advantage. Since I don't race supersport classes, this decision doesn't affect me one way or the other. I'd like to see as many of the supersport class riders attend though, since this will affect them. All riders in 600 supersport and open supersport. These two classes are affected. See you all Monday.
The old rules said something to the effect of: Aftermarket shocks may be used as long as the STOCK mounting points are retained. The 'link' modifies these points. Pretty basic. But we're getting distracted from my real question... Is this a special resolution vote?
yes, as per the minutes from December 17th, section C, item Vii : http://www.westwoodracing.com/forums/showthread.php?5984-Meeting-Minutes-for-December-17-2012
Since we are on the topic of changing supersport rules.... Sorry to jack this thread but I posted about voting for a possible change to 250 supersport rules here: http://www.westwoodracing.com/forums/showthread.php?6030-Tire-sizes-for-250-supersport
Dean, don't mean to stir the pot, but wondering if the bylaws of the WMRC states a certain number of members required to be in attendance for a special resolution to pass? For example, our strata requires 75% of owners in attendance to pass such bylaws at our AGM. Will the WMRC be writing something in the bylaws for this situation in the future?
No, luckily they don't. If we did have rules like that, I'm sad to say that even the special vote we had last year to save the season would not have come to fruition as well. I've yet to see a meeting with even a 66% attendance. If there was a rule like that, then no votes whatsoever would pass. Our bylaws are in the rulebook, and there is nothing on special resolution votes or anything like that. Again, if something like that was added, it would be detrimental to the club.
Not if the by-law allowed emailing members (snail mail to anyone not on-line) so we could vote on items electronically. Being on Vancouver Island would make it a $300 trip to go to a meeting to vote. Many members live hours out of town. It's worth considering since we are spread to the four winds.
I know this has been suggested in the past, but wondering if the new venue has a wifi that can be used for skype? We conference call 5 people with audio only on skype for my curling team and it works great. That way when there are discussions for or against a rule change, folks out of town can listen in to both sides of the argument? It would require some discipline on the part of those calling in on skype to not chat or socialize but it could be an option to ensure an informed vote happens.
Soooo... now that we have the link, may I propose allowing aftermarket triple clamps? Safety issue... /can 'o worms...
I think I brought up a similar idea. Dont' need wifi, just a 3g connection and any decent smartphone. Google Hangouts supports up to 10users, who can be all video/audio conferenced. Ustream can support almost unlimited viewers, and viewers can post questions on the stream into a group chat. I wouldn't be surprised if the virtual attendees equal or even double the numbers at the meetings.
