Let just suppose I thumbed my nose at a known rule (and consequence) time after time. On at least the third time, I get busted. I have no one to blame but myself and lo and behold I find out the along with the loss of membership, comes the loss of "posting on a discussion board". Oh dear...maybe I would get a life :rolleyes:

For cryin out loud folks, are we that addicted to the internet? With no disrepect, most of Roy's posts on the NCRS TDB have to do with dealer added accessories, for which I might add cause a point loss in judging, not visa versa. Granted, Roy throws an occasional nugget in the hat regarding passenger car parts that also are correct for Corvettes of the same vintage. Now that is good stuff for sure, but the price for those nuggets is an ample dose of the "woe is me" demeaneor in most of his other contributions because the NCRS doesn't give "extra credit" for the dealer added stuff......... Hello??

What was the point of the original post on this topic anyway? Truth be known, it just more of same in my opinion. Damning praise of the NCRS is no praise at all. I've said more than I originally intended, but frankly I've got a belly full of this and needed to get it off my chest..

tc

This post may end up being a record breaker.

In am becoming convinced that there is a gene somewhere in human DNA
that is either turned on or off.

If it is off, a person will take an opportunity and do what he wants.

If it is on, a person will take an opportunity and make everyone else do what he wants.

Periodically this gene is duplicated with potentially extreme results.

The clash between these two "personality types" is the stuff of history.

If for no other reason, don't expect world peace soon . . .

:flag:

Perhaps they should refrain from sending Roy's Driveline and Restorer too! That will show him. The NCRS is not passing the sniff test on their own rules.:bs

I am quite frankly puzzled by the depth and tone of this thread.

On one side we have those people who hate NCRS, and have jumped into this with both feet.

On the other side we have the people who hate people who hate NCRS, and have also jumped into this with both feet.

The question here is simple: does the violation that Roy committed include being banned from the TBD. NCRS obviously thinks so, although I am hard pressed to reach the same conclusion, based on the penatly statement in the JRM.

The answer, however, is not so simple, because we now have also have the Rule of Unintended Consequences.

Roy deserves to be punished as stated in the JRM, and he admits that.

The unintended consequence of his being banned from the TBD is that other members lose access to his base of knowledge. In addition, I also understand that he will not be allowed to continue his work on the 53-55 judging manual revisions.

As to the point that his posts are mostly about accessories anyway, and are not worth much, the phrase that covers that is "slippery slope". Would the same statement be made if we were talking about one of the half dozen or so people that we all recognize as Subject Matter Experts?

It doesn't matter who the person is. If he or she answers one question for one other member, they have contributed enough to be there.

As for the comments to "take this to your regional rep", I have personally been down that road a number of times, and always reach a dead end. I do not fault my regional rep; I truly believe he is working the issues I bring to him as hard as he can, and I commend him for that.

I am confident of one thing. NCRS will solve this problem soon. I predict that the next version of the JRM will say something like "violations of the rule will result in suspension from all NCRS sponsored activity for a period of 13 months."

Anybody been across the street-----------------er, the internet, to visit the "other" Corvette site?
As I mentioned waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay earlier, on this site, people will discuss and hash out differences of opinions and/or conflicts. Over there they won't do that. Anytime any personal conflict or controversial issue surfaces, they just ignore it and won't discuss the issue.
WELL NOT THIS TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!! And personally, I think it is way past time that they began to debate over a conflict issue.
Oh ya, and of course, they are frequently making comments about the N*&$ bashing that is going on here at CF (remember, I've been a N*&$ member for over 30yrs), but yet if you read through their replies, you will discover there are some internal criticisms. For years, I've pointed out some attitude issues that need to be addressed, and for years, they were simply "swept under the carpet" and business remained as usual. I must admit that over the past few years, some things have made noticeable improvements.
They are STILL somewhat aloof toward people like me who have a car that doesn't meet flight standards or survivor standards.

Tom Parsons

This was essentially the point I was trying to make, is the penalty "consistently applied"? Apparently someone earlier in the year was suspended for the same infraction, so I ask, was he banned for 15 months? Was his use of the TDB suspended as well? If we look back over the last 3 years, was everyone who violated the rule given the same punishment? If the answer is yes to all of the above, then as much as I understand Roy's frustration, I think the penalty is appropriate in this instance. Again, this is an outsider's view.

You have been a naughty boy, go to your room! :D Jeesh...

I agree. Most people at the car shows knows cars are coming and going constantly. Walk around bloomington or Carlisle. How many cars are leaving or coming into the field late? Not to mention going to a local cruise nights where people are getting off work and coming to the cruise shows. People who go to these shows should watch out for the traffic.

Also, Roy, I get alot of technical advice from you so keep posting! It really helps my project! I get more helpful information from here than any other place.

Roy knew the rules
 

Roy you knew the rules before you entered. If you had to leave early you should not have entered. You broke a rule now do the time and stop moaning like a little kid. Did you think because it was you that you deserve special treatment and it should be ok for you to leave early. Most people would like to leave early and get on the road but we abide by the rules.

The other much-discussed case of a 13 month suspension was indeed due to leaving the judging field while judging was still active. Paul Borowski referred to this way above.

The owner in this case chose to 'leave early' as judging had been terminated on the car due to the (correction) failure on the car during a PV.

Once and for all, was the above listed owner banned from the NCRS TDB or only judging activities?

First, Roy sorry you were subjected to this but as many have stated before rules are rules and IMO many in NCRS leadership roles have long since lost the idea of preservation and enjoyment of the cars we all cherish:D

I left the judging - show side of NCRS many years ago for simular reasons;)

I went to the dark side (MOPARS) and within a few years the overspray valve cap judges moved the MoPars in the same direction:(

I will continue to pay my dues each year as the "Restorer" and "Driveline" cannot be beat. I may do a road tour from time to time as they have always been well planned and FUN:cheers:

Dropped out of the Texas Chapter years ago after publishing the local chapter News Letter for several years - seems the only real Corvettes in Texas at the time had to be red or black 427/435's restored by that little ole shoppe in Houston (still the best in the business) Shadetree 396's that were driven to the shows just didn't pass the grade back in the day:nono:

Maybe like myself it is time to retire from the show circuit and just surf the forums :smash: as someone posted before some of us just don't fit in lol cool:

Blue
#7368

Why doesn t anybody post the name of the man who handed out the punishment-he created this whole mess,why not expose him? Again-this has nothing to do with the NCRS,just some knucklehead over zealous NCRS exec who should be banned from the organization for making such an unreasonable judgement and destroying the name of the organization.

From what I know, the 13 month suspension is uniform. IOW it's not a knee-jerk kangaroo court reaction.

I still don't understand the "can't leave early rule". To say it's in the name of "safety" and to protect spectators and judges is pure B.S. Go to any of the GoodGuy's event and observe. You'll see a collection of up to 3000 cars and at any time during the day, more than 100 cars are moving through a crowded venue. Towards the end of the day, several hundred cars are leaving or just cruisin' around. These events are held many times a year nationwide and have been for many years. Has anyone ever been hurt while judging or looking at cars? NO.
I wonder what's the real reason for that chicken sh!t rule.

Jim

P.S. For those that can't view the NCRS forum, there's a lot of members there that agree that this banishment thing is wrong.

From what you know? From what I know the other owner did not have his access to the TDB suspended. Do you know something I do not?

If you knew this already, why ask here and play dumb?

If correct, then this should be taken up by the affected persons with the NCRS administration.

There's nothing stopping Roy or anybody else from using the telephone or email if he believes the suspension was not justified or equitable instead of asking people here to 'relay' messages.

I do not know. My point is you do not know any better than me, so why act like everyone is being treated equally. You want to assume they are, but no one is willing to step up and confirm that and no one is willing to step up and tell the membership where in the rules it states participation on the TDB will be suspended for leaving the judging field early. I assume that the other owner did not have his pivileges suspended from the board because it is not stated in the rules that he would be. If I am correct the membership deserves to know that there is inequality in the way the rules are applied to different members. If I am wrong the membership needs to know rules are applied equally. But we certainly do not deserve to be left wondering how arbitrary the rule enforcement may be.

Well, again, as an outsider (but maybe this comment is better coming from an outsider, in that I have no dog in this fight), I see a major difference between a "car show" and a "judging field". Of course, at every car show I have ever been to, there are guys coming in late, leaving early or both. There are some cars in motion more or less all the time, everyone knows it, and everyone keeps their eyes open for it.

A judging field is a different animal all together, in that there are several teams that have to go over each car, and they are all the same car so they look essentially all the same. How are all the judges supposed to keep track of which teams have inspected which car and which teams reports go together to make a complete set when the cars are moving all over the place? Everyone can check every VIN before they look at anything, but the reality is that fewer judging mistakes will happen if all the cars stay in one place and let each team do their inspection. There is a safety issue too, in that judges will be laying on the ground and focusing their attention on the car they are judging, and won't be looking around for cars driving down the aisles.

So given that there are logistical, accuracy, AND safety issues that are served by keeping the cars stationary while judging is goin on, the rule makes a ton of sense to me and is not chickenstuff by any measure. If I want my car judged, and can't stay for the full amount of time of the judging, maybe I would be better served by going to the next meet where I can stay.