GentlemanJim Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 (edited) Jim Sorry ...My smart A%% side got the better of me. Edited October 11, 2007 by GentlemanJim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SA Friday Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 1. The numbers (percentages) based on BE posters is interesting, but it cannot show the amount of time people who don't post have spent cruzing the threads and reading but NOT posting. Reading the info from the regular BE posters is the important part, not necessarily the posts. Being an active poster on the threads is not for everyone. 2. I believe 39% is a fairly high percentage for an election in the US. I wish it were different, higher, but that is what we deal with. Too many believe that their one vote is not effective enough to matter and don't vote. Choosing to not vote is choosing to have no effect on the future. I don't get this choice (my opinion, not judging). 3. I have always thought Area 8 was losing a great representative for their area, but I also thought that no matter who won, they had a no-lose choice. All the candidates were the cream of the crop. Although I live in MD, I still vote for Area 2 since that is still my home. Having shot with Alan, I was very happy to see him elected. But you shooters in Area 8 just plain had it made in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driver8M3 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Hmmm...is close minded sorta like nearsighted??? close minded? reminds me of the close talker... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Reminds me of a closed thread. (play nice, folks) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 2. I believe 39% is a fairly high percentage for an election in the US. I wish it were different, higher, but that is what we deal with. Too many believe that their one vote is not effective enough to matter and don't vote. Choosing to not vote is choosing to have no effect on the future. I don't get this choice (my opinion, not judging). I still believe that those who choose NOT to vote (for whatever reason) AREN'T having NO EFFECT on the future (double negative ? ) ............. I believe they are having a NEGATIVE EFFECT on the future. If we continue to do nothing ... then we will get what we asked for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 2. I believe 39% is a fairly high percentage for an election in the US. I wish it were different, higher, but that is what we deal with. Too many believe that their one vote is not effective enough to matter and don't vote. Choosing to not vote is choosing to have no effect on the future. I don't get this choice (my opinion, not judging). I still believe that those who choose NOT to vote (for whatever reason) AREN'T having NO EFFECT on the future (double negative ? ) ............. I believe they are having a NEGATIVE EFFECT on the future. If we continue to do nothing ... then we will get what we asked for. And for the thousands of USPSA members who don't know the cantidates personally, or take the time to read up on them, or give a hoot about the Nationals, maybe not voting was the best thing that they could do. Is it better to have 10,000 votes where half of them were completely uninformed? Yeah in an ideal world they would have all taken time to read up on the issues and know who they should have voted for. But we don't live in that world. Personally I would rather have 5,000 people who cared enough to know who they were voting for vote. I don't really know how them not randomly voting for someone caused a negative effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipscbob Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 And for the thousands of USPSA members who don't know the cantidates personally, or take the time to read up on them, or give a hoot about the Nationals, maybe not voting was the best thing that they could do. Is it better to have 10,000 votes where half of them were completely uninformed? Yeah in an ideal world they would have all taken time to read up on the issues and know who they should have voted for. But we don't live in that world. Personally I would rather have 5,000 people who cared enough to know who they were voting for vote. Absolutely.....This is right on in my opinion. You can't presume that the majority of members care about the same issues that you do. For most of us, we just don't have the time to research the issues and candidates unless we are forced to. I run a small business and just do not have the time and bandwidth. As an example, I do not care about the issues raised with the nationals because I do not shoot them nor have any plans to in the near future. It just does not fit into my schedule right now. I am very happy with how the organisation has been run since I joined 5 years ago. Status Quo works for me right now. Is this clueless or practical? I don't really know how them not randomly voting for someone caused a negative effect. It didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 (edited) I would like to congratulate all those who not only won, but who stepped up to the line and took a shot at being elected to a position of trust in the organization we all love so much.As I noted in a private e-mail to a friend, I never felt this election was about me personally. It was about someone who had an amount of experience and was willing to make a 100 percent committment to the sport. I will continue to serve USPSA in whatever manner is approptiate in the future. When I got up this morning I checked and the sun was still rising in the East and appears to be heading toward the West. That is the way it should be. Thanks again to all those who supported me in any way. I appreciate it more than you will ever know. All is well. Gary Do it again and I'll vote for you again. Hope you stay near to continue supporting us, shooters. USPSA is better with you here. See you at the range! +1 Edited October 11, 2007 by GeorgeInNePa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 First of all I dont know how 10,000 card-carrying USPSA members can be completely uninformed? Don't all USPSA members get a copy of front sight ? Chuck are you suggesting that they can't read ? Because even if you don't visit either this fine forum, or uspsa.com, I'm pretty sure I read about the election in Front Sight. And I'm pretty sure that anyone who cares about this organization can take the 5 minutes it takes to read up on the candidates and make an informed decision. All I know is 9,000 + MEMBERS chose to do nothing with their ballots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Yes Chris, but it would've cost them $0.41 to return the ballot. So for 9,000+ members it is not worth that. They just don't care and for you and me that's the part that is so hard to believe or understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Boit Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 39% of participation ? ! Look like an election in France ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 $0.41 to return the ballot ??? So what you're telling me is I paid $0.82 to find out just how many people dont care ? (tongue in cheek people, relax) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul788 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 It sounds like most of us here are dissappointed with the results. I know I am. Instead of whining, lets develop a list of major things we believe need to change. My top three are: 1. Match Scheduling. It should be done at least 2 years in advance for the Nationals. Within an Area, it should be done at least 1 year in advance and arranged so no two Section or Area matches are on consecutive weeks(SC Section and Area 6 next year). 2. I believe the president of USPSA should be doing more to promote our sport than just shooting matches. If the incumbent is being paid to run the Nationals he needs to do so or pay the RM/MD a portion of his salary. I agree the pay is not great but he agreed to do the job for what it paid. 3. The Area Director should be holding a meeting of the Section Coordinators at least quarterly to keep up with issues and opportunities in the Area. Thats my input. I know we have at least one or two ADs who will take this and try to effect a change. Paul F. Beck A49023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce282 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 I would love to see to % of people who attended the Nationals that voted. I'd bet it's > 39%. I voted since I'm in Area 8 and we needed a new director, but I haven't attended the Nationals and don't know if I ever will. I'm currently not good enough to win a slot, and there's the $$$ factor. But I do feel for the people who are put in bad spot by not having the dates early enough, so I used that and other gems harvested here on BE to determine who to vote for for prez. But if you take someone who shoots local matches and maybe a sectional match or a close by Area match, they may not care who does what at USPSA as long the local matches are held, and their classification is updated each month. But hey we did get a chance to vote for our leadership, congrats to the winners, and thanks to all who stood up for office. Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sestock Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 It sounds like most of us here are dissappointed with the results. I know I am. Instead of whining, lets develop a list of major things we believe need to change. My top three are:1. Match Scheduling. It should be done at least 2 years in advance for the Nationals. Within an Area, it should be done at least 1 year in advance and arranged so no two Section or Area matches are on consecutive weeks(SC Section and Area 6 next year). 2. I believe the president of USPSA should be doing more to promote our sport than just shooting matches. If the incumbent is being paid to run the Nationals he needs to do so or pay the RM/MD a portion of his salary. I agree the pay is not great but he agreed to do the job for what it paid. 3. The Area Director should be holding a meeting of the Section Coordinators at least quarterly to keep up with issues and opportunities in the Area. Thats my input. I know we have at least one or two ADs who will take this and try to effect a change. Paul F. Beck A49023 1. Not going to happen under MV. 2. Ditto, plus he is sponsered by the venue that is hosting two of the nationals this year. (Conflict of Interest?) 3. Hell yeah, I am for that. That will be a change on how things have been handled for that last 6 years in A8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Within an Area, it should be done at least 1 year in advance and arranged so no two Section or Area matches are on consecutive weeks(SC Section and Area 6 next year). Have you ever personally tried to line up the committments necessary for a major match? If you did, you would understand that this requirement is about as realistic as saying "Section or Area matches should be scheduled only for weekends without rain or excessive heat." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 That sounds great Rob. You make it happen, and we'l all attend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Okay. That is enough political talk. You might want to take this over to the USPSA site. Closed. -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts