Rob Boudrie

Your best bet is to show up at a few matches and start asking questions. You'll find that people are going to be most helpful and very willing to share their information with you - and, range time/access permitting, you may even be able to try some guns.

No looking for new SVI IMM Open 45ACP screen time this fall

Club can impose any rules they wish, however, if local safety rules are applied at a USPSA match without the required waiver, the match is no longer a match being run in compliance with USPSA rules - which has the obvious implications on arbitrations and match sanctioning. For example, suppose an arbitration committee does it's job, rules that the competitor who drove down a popper did not commit a DQable offense, and ordered the competitor re-instated. The match would now be taking the position that they not only have their local rules, but they are not bound by the decision of the arb committee. There is no USPSA rule that requires poppers to be used in stages. One can run a mixture of targets and plates, neither of which may be driven down, and still be totally compliant. When faced with such challenges, it's worth looking for creative solutions that allow the match to be run within the rules and meet the requirements of both the rules and the host club.

That depends on the weight relative to what is expected. If you get a weight that is way out of spec you might want a re-weigh. I went minor at a match in Canada, eh? (under a procedure with no re-weigh) when a 200gr cast lead 45 came in at 192gr. Other people were getting the weight they expected - so I assume there was some sort of bubble in the casting. If you keep a $5 calculator in your shooting bag, you can quickly calculate what weight or velocity you need to make major with the extra round and rule out the one that is less likely to happen.

FOPA 86 is your friend, but getting lost in a crowd of one can be an even better friend.

You assume correctly.

I suggest you consider doing this as a Front Sight article - you may reach a few more people.

Certain types of bugs WILL be tracked down. Report a problem that blocks a critical function, and it will be investigated. Even Microsoft tracks down bugs (in fact, they have thousands of KB fixes, some generally available, and some available upon request, for specific bugs. We can't deal with "unoffical" spins of the released products, however, there are signaturing techniques that can be used to assure only files generated by official drops would be accepted by USPSA's server.

"Built from source" means using the standard tools - virtually every program uses standard libraries not compiled as part of the program. And it's not "can be built from source", but "IS built from source". Until you actually do it, you don't know if it will compile - something as trivial as an include directive that references a file by absolute rather than relative path (pointing to a file not in the distribution) can prevent a build and be totally unintentional. Were you involved in the process? Did you review the contracts? I was and did. And yes, USPSA has contracts reviewed by a qualified attorney before signing. Do you understand that the Steel Scoring Program, while expertly written and of decent quality, was something that USPSA had to license usage rights for? If you are considering volunteering and don't mind giving source rights, you don't have to deal with all that pesky contract negotiation, lease vs. buy pricing, pre-negotiated consulting fee for changes, etc. The standard contract process negotiation process will always be between you and getting work done if you wish to make a sale to USPSA. Great idea. I'll add it to the list. Just kidding The real issue with OSS is not "hackery" but a proliferation of versions each with a special feature a club wanted. First problem - people start calling Sedro for support on these unofficial versions. Then, the cute code introduces a bug that causes a hickup in the process and USPSA staff has to track it down. If that's not enough, consider what happens if USPSA fixes a bug or changes the output file format to add more data, and a club ups the file format version without incorporating the bug fix or adding the new data. If OSS ever became popular, and MD5 checksum (or one of the newer better ones) could be added to the output files, and the version distributed by USPSA would use an undisclosed seed value. I've seen it happen. It's possible to attach to the EzWinScore database via ODBC and shove data in. We've had some cases where bugs are reported, we find data constructs we don't think the code has any way to create - and later learn that the club's technoweenie shoved data directly into the database. Ooops. No, but when someone calls in and reports a bug with version 3.1415 or whatever, Roger knows EXACTLY what code they are running.

The only time I've ever seen it cause a problem is when one got loose and the match had to shutdown shooting to chase a dog around the stages. There is a very nice Australian cattle dog that frequently comes to matches, and his person always has a bowl of water out for him. I usually have dog treats or granola bars in my bag since my dogs have taught me it is impolite to eat without offering some to any canines that happen to be watching.

There are no formal "business rules" for contributed software. I've been doing volunteer work for USPSA since the time when everyone thought I was insane because everyone knew the web would not amount to anything. The original EzScore (Dos) and EzWinScore were developed on a semi-volunteer basis. The amount the developer was paid for full rights was about the cost of an open gun at the time - not the "well into five figure" quotes I have seen for similar work. Too bad he died over a decade ago (cancer). If you are interested in starting a project, PM me with a # and time to call. We have had several false starts with volunteer projects. Usually, the outcome is: - Initial enthusiasm, followed by nothing ever getting done - Determination to get paid - which will only happen if USPSA has made a decision to invest not only the money, but the management manpower to monitor the process, figure out contract milestones, etc. You will find that USPSA would be very interested in a scoring program, but you need to be clear about your expectations at the start. Would it be a volunteer project or something you would expect to sell? Please be up front and don't be vague with an "aw shucks, I just want to help the sport" if you intend to ask for a large chunk of cash when you're done. Any scoring program supported as an official USPSA product must be built from source code by HQ staff. This requirement is in place to assure that USPSA can maintain any such program. The one part with which I strongly disagree is the comment "without adding to their workload". Someone at HQ has to make sure all critical features work properly, that the input formats used (classification update) are processed properly, and that the output files (classification, results upload file and Palm transfer files) are totally compatible. Sure, most of it is obvious - but there will still be questions to be answered, issues to be resolves, and design issues to be worked out. Unfortunately, the world needs its share of REMFs on any project. If that were not the case, the hardware and software development industry would not be wasting money hiring one manager for every 6 to 12 developers. Assuming that a project can happen without HQ involvement to make sure the new program is fully compatible, and the user experience meets the needs of a broad spectrum of users, is not realistic. Well, maybe it is but only if Bill Noyes has a bunch of free time on his hands.

One technique I use when trying to resolve a problem is ask "Do you have the authority to do what I am asking, or is that beyond you decision making authority?". If the answer is no, I ask to speak to someone with sufficient authority to actually make a decision rather than someone who will simply arrive at a decision within the limited scope of their authority.

If your contact info ever changes, be sure to get the original theft report case file updated. When a PD turns up a hit when running an NCIC stolen gun check, they will generally contact the PD that originally reported the gun to NCIC which may (or may not, depending on the PD) contact the victim. A friend had an Ed Brown stolen from his condo in MA. It's a long story, but it took two years and he got the gun and one of the mags back, along with the death certificate for the person who got perforated while out on bail for an illegal carry charge.

I can't promise a timeframe, but one of the things on my 2do list is adding "registration data import" so that a standard (probably TSV) format may be used to import registration data. Of course, this has to not only be bullet proof but has to absolutely validate data so, for example, you can't import a Production shooter with Major power factor or do anything else to create any database setup not possible using the GUI. The real problem is manpower. I do a bunch of work on a volunteer basis, and Roger Maier has done an incredible job of learning how the development environment works which gives us some actual on-staff in house expertise. The various web projects, the Steel Challenge, the Scholastic Steel challenge, and keeping EzWinScore up2date (using the current program as a base) and the "for the free or on-staff" resources tapped out. I don't have time to start another major project, and I don't think Roger has the time to learn a new development system and start a new program either. Hiring someone to develop a program is pricey and risky (what do you do if it doesn't work well and you've paid for time as it is developed... the answer is nothing except consider spending more money, or try to fix it yourself). If someone wants to start an open source project, or volunteer to do a new program, please let me know. BUT..... the historical problem with volunteers is that they do not hold themselves to the performance standard of a paid person. If you can keep commitments, and deliverable dates mean something when you are volunteering - great. If you think that "anything is better than nothing if I am donating my time" then it's probably not going to be a successful project. That is the only good reason that I have found, and I expect the folks at central command would agree.

All classifiers received by the close of business on the 10th of each month are used in that month's update, which generally occurs 2-4 days after the 10th. This gives USPSA time to process the scores (there is some manual processing on electronically submitted scores - pending members, invalid member numbers; plus there are a few clubs that still send in paper reports). The delay can be a few days longer if the 10th of the month falls during or close to the nationals. If your club submits score electronically, you can use the on-line system (follow the additional content link) on www.uspsa.org to check on the status of the scores in the USPSA process.

The problem with compensation is the slippery slope. If you compensate the president and MD for Area Championships, how do you justify not compensating other positions? What about the propmaster who spends a boatload of time before the match building the stages? Stats and registration? CROs? RO Staff? USPSA area directors? National, Area, Sectional and club webmasters? If everyone takes a slice of the pie all you'll have left over is a dirty pan and no pie. Once you start compensating for a job you can guarantee you will be doing so forever - and those people who would normally have volunteered to be a club pres, match director, etc. will expect to be treated "fairly". The de-facto local standard at some of the clubs I shoot at in A7 seems to be free shoots for full time staff (You don't get a freebie for picking up the timer and running your squad, but probably do if you are at the range the day before the match building stages and also work the teardown). Amen to that one. I've turned down projects people want to pay be for because they couldn't afford anything coming close to what I get on my day job, and do other projects for free because I want to.

I'll try again... The two wholesale suppliers I am familiar with do not charge dealers a Hazmat surcharge for including powder or primers on an order dropped off at the shop. They run their own trucks, so they pay the DOT hazmat registration fee, but are not pay a separate fee each time they put an additional box on the truck. They treat their hazmat as being in the same category as gas for the truck and the driver's wages -overhead. If the shop adds an order for a case of primers or powder, the dealer cost of that product is added to the order without a hazmat adder. One of the suppliers requires "whole case order only" for powder; the other does not. This makes it practical for the shop to get reasonable quantities without the need to "batch up" to amortize the hazmat surcharge. My point is that not all shops pay a $22.50 UPS hazmat charge on each package containing up to 50,000 primers. The DOT requires a hefty registration fee for carriers who transport hazmat materials, but I don't think the wholesalers using their own trucks cough up anywhere near $22.50 each time they put a package of primers or powder on the truck. You can read all about the fees at http://www.phmsa.dot.gov. Incidentally, there is a proposal to increase the hazmat registraiton fees - which no doubt means UPS et. al. will be increasing their hazmat fee by a multiple of the incremenal cost imposed upon them. But, none of the undermines the original point being made - there really isn't that much room for profit in selling primers at retail. Do you pay a per-box hazmat fee? If so, is the truck run by the supplier or is it a common carrier?

Not necessarily. A properly drilled safe can be repaired with strength in the patched area being stronger than an unpatched area - though drilling would invalidate any UL rating. A repair person would generally use a safe saver pin: http://www.lockmasters.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWCATS&Category=653 They key to proper drilling is tools and knowledge. Relocker locations can vary even with the same safe model, and if the person drilling doesn't know where they are, it can be a hit or miss proposition. I suggest removing the interior door of the safe and getting some photos for your files - being sure to include a reference point and something for scale (I taped a ruler to the inside of the door when I took the file photos of my safe). If you ever need a drill job, the person doing it is going to be both impressed and grateful when you show that you are the most prepared client he's even had. Mechanical locks often given an indication when they start going bad. You just need to open it once and then replace it. Electrical locks tend to fail "all or nothing" and you don't realize there is a problem until you are SOL.

Not necessarily. I know of two distributors who service the Northeast US who run their own delivery trucks. My local shop gets a weekly shipment from one, and there is no surcharge for adding powder or primers to the truck. Powder has been readily available throughout the shortage, but not primers. The problem is the markup. There are no "secret shop prices" available for smallish quantities of primers (ie, less than pallet load). I've seem the dealer price list from my local shop's supplier, and and from a ammo company with their own fleet of ammo trucks (Beikirchs's, Rochester NY). The prices per box are generally no more than $1 or $2 less, if that, than the Powder Valley or Widener's prices. When you factor in the fact that shops need 20%+ on the small stuff to make it worth their time, and sales tax, you end up with a situation where few people who consider a case of 5,000 to be a personal shortage buy their primers at the local retail store.

Locks - Electronic are more convenient but pose a greater risk of lockout. Note that even the best safe guarantee will probably not cover a lockout (Google the Bane saga - he had a problem with a Canon, and they explained their obligation was to give him a new lock, not help him open his safe). Security - Two big issues are "weight" and "wall thickness". Standard gun safes are 10 gauge; some better ones are 3/16. A few are 1/4". There is a big difference in strength, price and weight each time you go yup a notch on the weight. Both of these are more important that number of relockers; glass relockers; size of bolts; thickness of hardplate; etc. Door - Worry more about what it takes to open the side door than the front door . If you're going to breech a box by force, the door can be one of the strongest points to attack; a side/top/bottom wall is easiest to cut through. Rating - Don't be impress by a RSC (residential security container) rating. I think a sardine can could get this rating - but some pretty decent gun safes have it as well. "Real safes" (the kind a jewelery or check cashing store could use to meet insurance requirements) have ratings like TL30 or TL30. Amsec makes a TL30 gun safe, but it's pricey and weights a ton and a half. The firearms limitation on homeowners policies is generally for theft or mysterious disappearance. If the guns are trashed in a house fire, they are generally covered just like any other household possession. If this is the case with your policy, you may need the safe more for burgularly protection than fire protection.

The book balancing is an interesting idea. The Cunningham program already does that for steel. My concern with a book balancing approach is that it may be too easy to mis entering something. By requiring each hit to be affirmatively entered, there is a pretty decent check with no assumptions - with the setup you describe, one missed hit on the screen will not be caught by the system. The last major update of the Cunningham program added in the need to enter NPM (no penalty misses) on fixed time stages for the additional data verification value.

Something I am thinking about doing with results for local and major matches. The system currently sends you an email every time results with your member # are upload if you have an email address on file in your on-line USPSA member profile (set it on www.uspsa.org/members). I am thinking of enhancing this to send your hit factor and current percentage for each stage. That way, if you're shooting a big match and have an email enabled phone, you'll get a report of your performance while you are on the range. I know the nationals staff uploads results several times a day, and they would probably increase that frequency if I give them a reason such as this. So, how many people do you think would actually use this?

Saul demoed his Iphone app for me at the show show. It's a very nicely done app and great for practice and offered at a reasonable price point (I think it's $19.95). It is unsuitable for running matches, and it does not appear he is heading in that direction with that product. Two issues: #1: No integration with EzWinScore (for US) or MSS (for the world) #2: No "target by target" validation. A program that tells you you are a hit short only after you get to the end of a stage, rather than when you are at the individual target, is useless for matches as you would have to leave all targets untaped until after the score had been finalized. There is simply not time for this. Both the Cunningham/Autoscoringsystems and ThreeDogSoftware palm based programs perform this sort of validation.

I did, but it was outside the loop that checked to see if each shooter was to receive a message rather than at the inside top of the loop. As a result, if nothing triggered the sending of a message, the string variable I used to contain the message remained set and was sent. It also meant that, as far as the code was concerned, the variable was not "uninitialized" and did not generate run time errors in the log. A more accuarate description would be "failed to re-initialize".