vluc Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Guys we did meet on it in a conceptual mode. We have agreed on what we want this to say in concept, and we all agree to it in theory.A small group of BOD members, including myself, are trying to word smith this thing into some shape that the entire BOD can actually make a recorded vote on. As we continue to work through this, from time to time one thing leads to a discussion of other issues. We are desperately trying to make this a good work product. Chances are it will still not be absolutely perfect, because as we have been told here on the forum, that maybe we just don't understand English However, I am confident that it will be much clearer and cleaner. I am confident that it will go a long way toward telling the member what they can and what they can not do to their PD guns. I am probably part of the problem on the delay as I brought up an issue that has not totally been resolved as of yet. All in all, I am jazzed about what we are doing and believe that it will be a good document when we get the rough edges off and a good tune up on it. As I have said before, nothing has changed from what many of us thought the procedure was. Go on about your business. The sun still rises in the East and still sets in the West. I believe it will continue to do so. Gary Seriously, I'd be glad to proof it for you to see how it is. I have high security clearance and will be sworn to secrecy. You should float it by some established production shooters to get some feedback before you issue a final ruling. just my opinion.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 (edited) You act like I have never shot PD before. I refer you to the line under my avatar. While I only had to beat one guy in a wheelchair and one guy on a walker, a win is a win. Edited February 6, 2009 by Gary Stevens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sslav Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Ref#2 sorry but I must swim against the prevailing current here...the rules being discussed here ARE enforcable. The test is whether they are easily, objectively and reliably enforceable. Specific problems with each are detailed below Enforcement would be a bit of a pain and would mean adding/modifying certain rules presently in USPSA or IPSC to allow for random inspections of competitors weapons and also inspection of any competitor's weapon(s) suspected of cheating as well as any who place within the top 5 in any match. Top five shooters may not be known for at least hours after the last shot was fired. In a multi-day match any or all of the top five could well be several states away. Even if you can have the top five shooters present their guns for inspection - how do you know that the gun is unaltered from the shape it was in during the competition or if it is even the same gun? This fails reliability test. Will you pull shooters off the line (randomly or in case of being suspected of cheating) and inspect their guns? Well what if you detail stripped the gun and it passes with flying colors. The shooter then goes on to have a malfunction(s) following the inspection. Does the shooter now have cause for re-shoots or a complete refund of his match fee (and hotel fee and travel expenses) because some stranger had his gun in pieces and may not have put it back together to the shooter's standards? It would mean having volunteers serve in an "Inspector" capacity preferably on an "Inspection Committee" so no one persons opinion will rule the day.A tough thing at small/local type matches but entirely doable for larger ones. And what would be the selection criteria for these inspectors? Are they required to have high degree of familiarity with the internal of say five or eight various gun models? Would they have hold certifications or "Yah! I know Glocks! (or CZs, M&Ps, XDs, Beretas, EAA etc..)" good enough? Will they be supplied with micrometers and detailed specs for each gun? And can you with 100% certainty determine if a given part was intentionally altered from the factory configuration or if it is a result of wear in? Sorry this fails both the ease of enforcement and the objectivity criteria. Rules ARE enforcable. Hardly. Absolutely. There will be unforseen problems that will crop up and they will (hopefully) be dealt with in a professional, fair, and impartial manner by the R.O.s at the match.Perhaps this will lead to further tweaking of the rules so the end result down the road will be rules and enforcement that work pretty well. Or perhaps all of these problems can be avoided by creating rules that can actually be enforced without tearing down people's guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Gary, I know this might sound crazy to you guys, but consider floating it here prior to final publication. I remember when the last batch of classifiers were released. Within minutes (?) the collective experience here on the forum (a.k.a., the abundance of seasoned match officials and DRL's) were able to identify a number of issues with them. The feedback was almost universally incorporated into the revised documentation. It's going to get picked to the bone here anyway, and just possibly some of the resulting suggestions will make sense to you folks. Crazier things have happened! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 You act like I have never shot PD before. I refer you to the line under my avatar. While I only had to beat one guy in a wheelchair and one guy on a walker, a win is a win. See the post above by ima45dv8. More eyes make a better product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Jones Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Gary, I know this might sound crazy to you guys, but consider floating it here prior to final publication. Having been on both sides of this fence...... Doomsday scenario! And a sure way to delay the product by weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 (edited) I have a proposal in the works, but it doesn't involve a full fledged forum feeding frenzy. Getting it right is very important, but getting it published in a timely manner is a great concern also. To turn this into a prolonged thrash and bash is not the correct direction IMO. Having said that though, I see a way to get a small group of outside eyes to review the final document before a final vote. Keeping the group small allows the process to be manageable and yet informative. I am reminded of the saying that the search for the perfect is the enemy of the good. If we can get a truly good document, I will not be disappointed if it is not a perfect document. Time will tell. Edited February 6, 2009 by Gary Stevens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Gary, you continue to impress with your open-minded approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Uh Oh, now I am going to have to rethink all of this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jman Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Gary, I know this might sound crazy to you guys, but consider floating it here prior to final publication.I remember when the last batch of classifiers were released. Within minutes (?) the collective experience here on the forum (a.k.a., the abundance of seasoned match officials and DRL's) were able to identify a number of issues with them. The feedback was almost universally incorporated into the revised documentation. It's going to get picked to the bone here anyway, and just possibly some of the resulting suggestions will make sense to you folks. Crazier things have happened! I agree completely. A better vetting environment will be impossible to find. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makomachine Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Shot my second match ever with the XDm - Limited classification based on the current rules and interpretations. Given the 15 procedurals experienced across two of the 7 stages - the Limited classification was the least of my worries! Just wasn't my day mentally with a line crossing on the first stage and then completely missing a mandatory reload on another... Hopefully some of the experienced members will get a chance to provide input on the new rules prior to implementation. I think that will be a win/win for everyone and look forward to the clarification when it becomes available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jman Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 tick...................tick....................tick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 tick...................tick....................tick patience is a virtue.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireant Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Yeah, but if we were all patient we'd sit at home and knit sweaters or something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhop Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 (edited) maybe the silence in this thread is because people have gotten a pre look and no more questions to ask, i have not received them nor need to see them Edited February 13, 2009 by mhop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I just got off the phone with this. The train is moving, it will arrive at the station soon. Other than that, I can only say that patience is a virtue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I just got off the phone with this.The train is moving, it will arrive at the station soon. Other than that, I can only say that patience is a virtue. But its a whole new train coming into the station,right? One thats not gonna crash as soon as it leaves? Hopefully? The last train is a fiery ball of flames that fell off the mountain side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Actually it is more like the Coors Express Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Actually it is more like the Coors Express OH Hell yeah......now you're speakin my language Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rising Sight Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Isn't that the Silver Bullet Express? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 (edited) I was speaking of the train our Eastern Kentucky bootlegers ride. Edited February 13, 2009 by Gary Stevens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wide45 Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Wooooo WoooOOOOooo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireant Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I think the last rule was written while on that train . Lets keep them off any trains this time maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 (edited) Look at it this way. If it had not been for a pending NROI interpretation, none of this would have happened. The BOD would not have heard many voices raised in one general direction, and while only on a single forum, probably represent the majority feeling of the folks who shoot PD. Because this did happen, we had a chance to, hopefully, do a lot of work on the PD rules that needed to be done. Sometimes things happen for a purpose that we might not understand at the beginning. Edited February 14, 2009 by Gary Stevens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Well said, Gary. Thank you (and the BOD...and everybody here). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts