[Bob Kuczewski]

6-21-2016-A.jpg (172.98 KiB) Viewed 4163 times

"The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

Isn't that Picture of those Birds of Prey Killer?

[Bob Kuczewski]

Read more: http://forum.hanggliding.org/viewtopic. ... z527p4weHM

That's a very good topic, and it's worthy of documenting. That's especially true since Jack wrote that one day his web site "will be effectively gone":

That said, there is a big big big slow downtrend in hang gliding pilots in general, and this site exactly mirrors it.

I see no reason for that to change. It will keep going down until one day, HG and this site, will be effectively gone.

The topic that Sam quoted was titled "MN's recreational land use laws". Here's the first post:

http://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/Liability%20Protection%20for%20MN%20Landowners%2012.13.13.pdf

I'm sure many are aware of this kind of thing, and I assume similar laws exist in other states. MN has a law described in the pdf above that grants owners of property liability protection if they permit land use without charging a fee. Outside of ushpa's insurance efforts, and individual site efforts, if your state doesn't have such a law, getting a like minded group together to push for one could help open / reopen / and maintain existing sites in areas. It can be surprising what a small political action group can do, members of other sports would have an interest as well.

First on the scene was Jonathan Dietch (aka NMERider) who tried to throw water on the idea:

http://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/Liability%20Protection%20for%20MN%20Landowners%2012.13.13.pdf

All 50 states have recreational use laws: http://nationalaglawcenter.org/state-co ... ional-use/   This topic has been discussed here and on a host of other forums at great length. There is a con artist who goes around trying to delude unsuspecting pilots that all you need is to wave this statute in a land ownwer's face and there's no need for third party liability insurance, etc. This is a lie.

It's still up to each and every land owner whether or not to grant permission to use their land or require liability coverage or tell us "No" altogether. It starts and ends with diplomacy and respect for people's property rights. It takes a lot of work to keep sites open or to establish relationships with land owners or governing agencies.

Good luck on your work in site development in MN!

Toesstub43 cites the Colorado Recreational Land Use Statute:

Colorado also has a similar law: https://www.americanwhitewater.org/reso ... tatute.htm

But it protects the landowner from liability, not those using the land for recreation. If you tear up the landowner's property or hurt someone while on the property, you are liable.

Mark Forbes joins Jonathan Dietch in supporting USHPA's monopoly insurance and downplaying the role of the Recreational Land Use Statutes. Other pilots join the discussion, and Mike Jefferson uses the term "extortionists" to describe PASA, RRRG, and USHPA:

You guys are getting closer. Keep thinking outside the box. I am saving a ton of money for my hang gliding school by not giving another dime to PASA, RRRG and USHPA extortionists.

I have about 20 USHPA 30 day waivers if anyone wants them, I have no use for them. I fly all my tandems at Ed Levin Park under FAA part 103 rules with private insurance.

Mike Jefferson
USHPA #76175 H-5
AUA #1005 Master Pilot, Advanced Instructor, Tandem Instructor, Regional Director
US Hawks #63 (all previous ratings recognized)
I'll join any organization that promotes hang gliding!

Mark Forbes blathers on about the need for insurance, but Underdog counters very effectively:

Could someone explain why ushpa and some members seem to be bringing this insurance situation into areas that are only creating a long term and probable unnecessary detriment as far as site access go.Insuring a site should only be used as a last resort to gain access on private property and should be paid by those pilots using that site. I have been in this sport a long time and have seen that ushpa has been creating the cage that has caused most of these issues. No other sport I can think of has created a framework that limits it's own access.It is the profit motive on these access arrangements which brings about many of the problems.Protecting profit and site access do not mix, it creates a much more dynamic liabilty situation. This is a wrong turn ushga made about 30 years ago.

Mike Jefferson adds immediate support for Underdog's position:

Great question. IMO, the ushpa uses their insurance policy as a way to control the pilots the sites and now the instructors. If you ask me, we probably don't need insurance at any of the sites operated on public land. The ushpa cool-aide drinkers pitch the insurance to OUR public parks so they can remain in control of the great hang gliding cash cow. One could, and may soon argue that if the public parks require the hang gliding pilots to be insured they would have to require the mountain bikers, the kayakers and the volley ball players to carry insurance as well. If not, why are the hang glider pilots being discriminated against?

This all done to keep the endless flow of money to the ushpa run by a small group of criminal extortionists.

Can someone tell me how many pages of rules and regulations the ushpa uses to control the evil pilot members? I know the FAA regulations regarding hang gliding are less than 2 pages.

Underdog continues:

No conspiracy theories here, just some bad decisions from USHPA,
Time for a complete overhaul

Mission Statement
The United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association (USHPA) will pursue its mission through:

Advocacy. USHPA will interact, proactively when possible and reactively when required, with agencies, organizations and individuals whose interests affect our sport.

Communication. Externally, USHPA will advance the positive awareness of hang gliding and paragliding among the non-flying public. Internally, the organization will cultivate a culture of communication and transparency.

Community. USHPA will promote a sense of community among members both locally and nationally.

Flying sites. USHPA will support the development of new flying sites and the preservation of existing sites.

Learning. USHPA will support learning, in part by providing an organizational framework for instructor and pilot training and certification.

Safety. USHPA will steadily foster a culture of safety.

That's when Red spoke up:

Campers,

I believe USHPA has totally and intentionally FAILED in regards to transparency. I wanted a voting record from each RD posted. We were told (summarized):

    "Recording RD votes would slow things down in the meetings."

Then use electronic voting, that won't slow anything down.

    "No electronic voting. Too complex."

Then just put up a video camera, to record RD votes by a show of hands at the meetings. We can sort out the RD votes recorded later, after the meeting, for the Minutes. That won't slow anything down in the meetings.

    "No video cameras or any recordings will be permitted at the meetings."

Why not? I want to see how my RD votes.

    "Just ask the RD yourself." <-completely side-stepping the question of "Why Not?"

An RD agreed with me, face-to-face, and told me that he had voted against the no-recording measure.
A spectator-member attending that meeting has told me, the vote for no-recording of RD voting was unanimous. There would be no recording of RD votes, just a fast count.

How do I know if I want to keep or replace my RD, if we can not know how they vote on issues? I do not need lies.
This entire argument was a direct and intentional violation of transparency.

If at any time USHPA wants to help to restore the faith of its' members, the BOD is welcome (and encouraged) to reverse this behind-closed-doors policy and post the voting records of the RDs. Most members are not able to attend USHPA meetings personally.

Cheers,
........Red.........................
Pssst! New pilot? Free advice, maybe worth the price,
https://user.xmission.com/~red/ <<--COPY & PASTE this URL into your browser
H4, Moyes X2, Falcon Tandem, HES Tracer, Quantum 'chute. USHPA #28198

Red's account was exactly true, and Underdog underscored the seriousness of Red's comments:

Red
If what you say is true and we have no transparency and accountability, it is worse than I thought.

Alan Crouse defended USHPA's lack of transparency:

Recording Votes = red herring (at least for the past 4 years).

Most votes are unanimous. The ones that aren't, the dissenters and abstentions are asked if they want their votes recorded. Almost always do in my experience. I just went back through the last 3 sets of minutes. There were several named abstentions, two instances of unnamed abstentions, and many, many motions carried unanimously.

Look at the minutes (they are available on the website to all members). If your RD was present and isn't listed otherwise, they voted with the majority.

Alan

What Alan didn't mention is that USHPA's system of "unanimous with dissenters and abstentions" DOES NOT give members the ability to positively identify the Directors voting in favor or opposition on any item. Any Director could say they weren't in the room at the time of the vote and did not support the most recent atrocity that had been passed. That completely undermines the ability of members to hold Directors accountable at the next election.

But Red could see right through Alan's "red herring". Red replied:

Alan,

This is not a "red herring," it is the point at which I lost a lot of respect for the actions of USHPA. There was no posted record that I could challenge any RD on, about issues they may have supported or opposed. It is very much related to serious USHPA issues like land use, insurance, and other actions taken (or not) by "our" organization. The explanation of "inconvenience" for our RDs is not a valid reason to deny public accountability to the membership for these issues, which affect every member. It makes the BOD appear to be secretive, elitist, and beyond any real accountability to the member pilots. Is this what we want?

Come back and say YES or NO here: Can I see how my RD has voted on past issues?

That posting of voting records would not fix everything immediately, of course, but it would give pilots a valid basis to decide on their serving RD, and whether that person truly represents the pilots in their region.

Red has asked for a "YES" or "NO" answer. But here's what he got from Alan Crouse:

Red:

Go look at the minutes. Unanimous tells you exactly how they voted.

Alan

Again, Alan completely ignored the possibility that any Director could say that they weren't in the room at the time of the vote. USHPA's "unanimous" does not tell you "exactly how they voted", and it is not accountability.

Red was quick to respond:

Alan,

BS! Tell me why there is no RD voting record that I can access from "our" HG/PG club!

Any RD can say they abstained from any one vote, or missed the vote due to absence, or even a bathroom break. I really want a written record that can be accessed by members. Canada's HG/PG club can do it, so why can't the USA club?
Look here:
https://www.hpac.ca/pub/?pid=202

It is exactly the resistance to giving the USA membership the RD voting records that makes anything coming from the BOD meetings into a suspicious event. What you propose (every member tracking every RD vote, and sometimes only by inference) is ridiculous, in the true sense of the word.

Post a voting record, for each RD in the meetings. Anybody who is consistently absent from the voting should not be an RD, plain and simple. Same goes for those who vote against what their Region would want.

That's when Alan began backpeddaling:

Red:

I agree that you should be able to see how your RD voted. I just happen to think that the current minutes successfully accomplish that. The Canadian version is certainly nicer, but they have a tiny 7-member board meeting on-line. Our 27-member board is a lot less amenable to on-line meetings (conference calls with more than 6 or 7 people trying to participate are less than productive). The USHPA board also meets in different locations across the country. Does it add any value to show "Voted For" followed by 27 names (like the Canadian version) versus "Passed Unanimously" as the current minutes already do? It's the same information and tells you just as much about your RD. Check the minutes. It's all right there.

I think you should be able to see how your RD voted, in fact I think you already can.

- Alan

Jim tried to offer a diversion:

Why the hell can't people just call or write to their RD and ask!? Is that so difficult? Then you can b----/admire all you want online about the no reply or reply. I don't get it...

Underdog and Red each had the right answer:

Why the ---- should we have to call or write, it should all be there in black and white.

Blindrodie,

Okay, then back to the original issue. I asked an RD directly how he had voted on a certain issue. Knowing my choice on that issue, he told me that he had voted against it, the same as I would have. A member who was there watching the vote told me later, the voting was unanimous, in favor of the measure that I opposed. The RD just lied straight to my face. THIS is why we need a record of RD voting posted.

I would not re-elect that RD, because he is voting for interests that are not what his region would want. The same goes for RDs who avoid voting on important issues. I want to see the voting record, for any USHPA issues.

Mark Forbes added his usual pro-USHPA rebuttal by again claiming that the records were in the minutes. But Forbes completely ignored the cases where Directors might have stepped out of the room or simply not chosen to vote. Both of these possibilities give cover to Directors for later claiming that they didn't support the latest USHPA atrocity.

Red pretty much ignored Mark Forbe's false claims and went back to Alan:

Alan,

Are you not a Regional Director, AND the Vice President of USHPA?

I find it odd that you and Rebardan are both RDs, and vocally oppose having a public record of your voting. Just do the thing Canadian style (you might want to use the easy video recording process that YOU and the BOD have outlawed at the BOD meetings). I see no valid reason to avoid posting the voting records of the RDs, except to have no accountability to members for the RD voting. I (and probably others) want to see who voted, who did not vote, and which way they voted, for every issue addressed by the BOD.

"Unanimous" does not tell people who skipped the vote by their total absence, leaving the meeting before the vote, or abstaining.

Alan Crouse began backpeddaling even more in response to Red's unwavering objections:

Red:

I've never opposed a public record of my votes. I am an RD and posted my own record of votes for years. Not one member has ever asked how I voted on anything (though I'd be glad to share).

What easy video method do you mean? The small Canadian board (7) seems to meet on-line. That's not very practical for a 27 member board. Is there some quick, easy and not costly method you would like to propose? The competition is "All in favor say aye; any opposed; any abstentions". (As a note, if members abstain the vote is not recorded as unanimous).

The existing minutes are clear, quick and simple. These are important attributes when you are bringing in volunteers for 2 days of meetings. Come up with something better and I'd be glad to take it forward.

Like I said at the top. The minutes already tell you how your RD has voted. Call me this weekend and we can go through some minutes. They really are quite thorough. Remember that we agree you should be able to see how your RD voted.

- Alan

But Red was holding all of the cards, and he played his video record card next.

Alan,

The BOD voted unanimously against using any recording equipment at BOD meetings, and NOW you ask me this?

Set up a GoPro camera (or a smart phone) at the head of the table, or anywhere that all BOD members can be seen clearly. A show of hands, for and against any issue, is all it takes. The taker of the minutes (who should know who is who) can sort out who voted for what, at their convenience later. This method will NOT slow down the BOD meetings, and the resulting written record will be clear, and easy to access. Ideally, it should be fairly similar to the posted Canada HG/PG club minutes.

At the Fall 2017 meeting, there was a vote on holding the Fall 2018 meeting in Florida, led by Martin Palmaz. Please tell me how the Region 4 RDs voted, on the Florida/Colorado site choice. Thank you.
I'll wait right here . . .

The Minutes that you now publish are useless for tracking the RD voting records, as the BOD desires, per the "unanimous" vote of the BOD.

Red had Alan between a rock and a hard place. So Alan began with the excuses ("I've only been on the BOD 4 years", "And remember, this is all volunteer effort"). Alan complained about the work to go through the video voting record for putting in the minutes. Well, Alan, is it somehow easier to get an accurate voting record without a video record? Alan also verified Red's earlier claims that some votes were not even in the minutes at all - a direct contradiction of Alan's earlier claims.

Red:

I've only been on the BOD 4 years. How long ago was this recording vote? More recently we have looked at whether the meeting could be streamed so more members could participate. Times may have changed a tad since whenever that was...

Sorry to pooh pooh your idea, but a smartphone or GoPro is never going to pick up the voting and I would pity the poor (volunteer) Secretary who had to watch 10 hours of meeting to try and see around people to catch the voting. If we could get the streaming thing working and had the video available to members for awhile, would that meet your goals? (No change in minutes, but members could watch the video for X months)?

You've pointed to the trivial issue of where to hold the next meeting as the example of not having complete enough minutes? Isn't there a single substantive topic to point to?

Work with me here. You have a BOD member who is willing to listen but is frankly skeptical that there is a significant improvement to be made. The minutes as they exist today seem quite complete and thorough. And remember, this is all volunteer effort. Something that is 'better', as fast, and not expensive would be interesting and in keeping with positions I have brought forward in the past.

- Alan

Red answered all of Alan's questions:

Red:
How long ago was this recording vote?

Ask Mark Forbes, he told me about it.

Sorry to pooh pooh your idea, but a smartphone or GoPro is never going to pick up the voting and I would pity the poor (volunteer) Secretary who had to watch 10 hours of meeting to try and see around people to catch the voting.

You only turn on the video camera for a vote, one minute per vote, not ten hours. Sheesh.

If we could get the streaming thing working and had the video available to members for awhile, would that meet your goals? (No change in minutes, but members could watch the video for X months)?

Nope, not at all! Nobody has time to watch "ten hours" of streaming video. Publish the votes by each RD in the Minutes, collected in any way you may wish. Simple as that.

You've pointed to the trivial issue of where to hold the next meeting as the example of not having complete enough minutes? Isn't there a single substantive topic to point to?

This is not a trivial issue to me! What gives you the right to dictate what is important to me? Or to anybody? Publish the RD voting record!

You can give every RD a sheet of printer paper, numbered one to fifteen (if there are to be fifteen votes) on the page. Each RD marks each item Yea or Nay, for each issue, to record their vote. Anybody who can not do that at a meeting probably has no business being there in the first place. That should not slow things down too much. I don't care how you record the voting, just be accurate and complete.

Have the BOD pass this issue: If there is no complete record of RD voting on an issue, then the issue is unresolved. Try again next time.

You say I can get the voting record from the minutes, and I just proved that nobody can do that. If the issue got a vote by the BOD, then it MUST BE an important issue.

Work with me here. You have a BOD member who is willing to listen but is frankly skeptical that there is a significant improvement to be made. The minutes as they exist today seem quite complete and thorough.

No, the minutes are NOT complete, NOR thorough. The minutes are sketchy, at best, where RD votes are concerned.

And remember, this is all volunteer effort. Something that is 'better', as fast, and not expensive would be interesting and in keeping with positions I have brought forward in the past.
- Alan

Hard to believe that nobody in California can find or write up a voting program of some sort. That way would be fast, accurate, easy, and maybe Open Source (free).

Please publish the RD voting record in the Minutes. We need to see if our RDs vote for their region's interests, or maybe something else. "If everybody agrees, then somebody is not thinking."

It's important to note that this discussion was held in 2017. Everyone involved certainly knew of my "Accountability Amendment" that I brought to the USHPA Board back during my own USHPA Directorship in 2009. You only need to search this forum for "Accountability Amendment" to find lots of references to that effort. At the time, I had proposed that if any single Director requested that the vote be recorded, then each Director's vote would be requested and recorded. Every Director knew about my proposed Accountability Amendment, and certainly Alan Crouse knew about it. I had also offered to write the software for USHPA (for free) that Red mentioned ("Hard to believe that nobody in California can find or write up a voting program of some sort").

So how did Alan respond? More backpeddalling:

I think the USHPA BOD is evolving. The most recent example is the outreach today on proposed changes. When I joined the board, committees met the first day and formulated proposals that the board voted on the next. There had already been an effort to get the agenda items out to the membership before the meeting; but there was usually no input on specific proposals (with some notable exceptions) as they moved from committee to board overnight.

Today's member e-mail reflects a determined effort to request input:
Review Proposed SOP Changes

Maybe you would like to help?

- Alan

That's when John "BubbleBoy" Borton (JB) offered his 2 cents:

All these years and the BOD members are STILL dancing around playing games (as you see right here) about this 'recording the vote" issue.

Kinda makes you think don't it.

JB

Steven Baran joined the argument by cheerleading for USHPA. I know Steven Baran somewhat personally, and he has disappointed me tremendously. His talk does not match his actions.

Happy New Year!

I'm just about to renew my USHPA membership. I look forward to it and can't imagine what flying hangs/paras would be like without USHPA's insurance, programs, magazine, etc. A bit of a disclaimer here .... I hold no USHPA offices nor volunteer with USHPA excepting that I am the current Prez of our USHPA Chapter in Region 1. I'm also a person who enjoys paying my taxes. Really. I got to live in Sudan for 6 months back in the 70s - out in roughly the middle of nowhere. Where people lived their lives - fairly short ones - without any external support, protection, services, etc. It made a lasting impression on me to witness such pronounced differences in support services between the USA and Sudan for the citizens of the two countries. My US Rep doesn't vote the way I would like in Congress - but she's serving our country and I'm proud of her for that. I don't vote for her but I admire her service and I'm surely not going to give up my citizenship because my political bent isn't the bend at the moment. It's the bigger pictures I'm most concerned with.

Since this thread has gotten a wee bit off topic from recreational land use laws to USHPA BOD voting records I'm feeling free to muddy the waters a bit further. Discussion is good. Voicing one's opinions is good. However, deciding to bail on being a USHPA member for some warts (real or imagined) is counter productive to flying hangs/paras as a whole (IMHO). The Association carries more clout with numbers in how it can represent us all. The USHPA may not represent particular individuals (per their thoughts/feelings) but it does represent our sports directly and indirectly in matters where it is dang hard to do individually. There are benefits to that representation that we can easily take for granted ..... so, warts and all, I take some pride in renewing my USHPA membership.

Steve Baran � U2 160 � Chattaroy, WA - USA � USHPA# 16529 � http://www.centeroflift.org

MTPilot countered Baran's USHPA cheerleading:

You say you enjoy paying taxes. Not everyone does, I only like to pay for value received. I am with you on improving site access and opening new sites but do not want it muddied in layers of costly insurance and unnecessary regulations. I would kindly state the RRG is inefficient and a bad idea. This is evident in replies I received from Mark Forbes in recent posts. We do need a national org than unifies pilots not a divisive one that cares only about populous regions or commercial interests. Currently the only vote we have is our feet. This is evident in the falling numbers of HG members, down to 2700. USHPA could be way more efficent, drop the magazine and related costs or make subscription optional to the few who want it. It's not the 150$ it's how it gets spent. We could use the money to lease/purchase sites as is common in other sports. At some point USHPA needs to respond, hopefully before more leave.

Jonathan Dietch joined Baran as another USHPA cheerleader:

We are stuck with the RRG because no one will sell USHPA liability insurance. We lost our outside liability coverage due to the negligence of a handful of HG and PG pilots over the previous years. Not only were these pilots negligent but many of them had absolutely no consideration for the impact their failures would have on either their victims or USHPA as a whole.

I have personally known a lot of negligent pilots since 1973 when I got started in this sport. Many of them are now dead. Many more are crippled for life. At least one triggered a liability insurance claim. Some have caused mid-air collisions that destroyed all the gliders involved but did not trigger liability insurance claims thanks to the diligence of Mark Forbes who created the USHPA liability waiver. Thank you Mark! I know others whose negligence was a direct contributing factor to the fatal accidents of others. Again, there were no liability claims made on these.

It's when each of us places third parties at needless risk of harm that we as an organization are placing our future at risk and putting a financial strain on the entire organization and so we wound up with the RRRG. If it wasn't for personal negligence all of our liability insurance costs would go down and not just in hang gliding. Every aspect of life.

If pilots weren't negligent they'd have far fewer accidents that injure just themselves. From a purely selfish standpoint it's in every pilot's interest to be vigilant for his or her own negligence but their peers as well. Much of what you are lamenting can be traced back to failure of individual responsibility. Too much of what's gone wrong with the sport of hang gliding started at the individual level.

Be a good friend to your peers and help them have fun while keeping reasonably safe. Be a good ambassador on behalf of the sport. Be a tactful diplomat when engaging your peers or landowners or authorities. Be welcoming of newcomers and show them a good example.

The population of HG pilots has shrunk due to attrition and much of this is due to aging. We are an aging population and pilots keeping dropping off the active list faster than pilots are joining or returning. There are vastly more recreational activities for HG to compete against today than there were in 1973 when I started. Other sports have suffered a similar decline during the past 45 years as well. We're not the only ones.

Get out there and be a cheerleader for the sport. :thumbsup:

Jonathan Dietch could not have been more wrong. USHPA did not lose their insurance "due to the negligence of a handful of HG and PG pilots". USHPA lost their insurance because they deliberately refused to act when they were presented with clear evidence of the negligence of those pilots and instructors BEFORE they had caused the injuries that eventually led to their loss of insurance.

Mark Forbes responded with another of his long blathering posts that I don't need to quote, but he did assert that he was not the author of the liability waiver.

Michael Grisham offered an important post about the Recreational Land Use Statutes:

The regulations are voluntary; you don't have to belong to USHPA to fly a hang glider.

The USHPA is not a regulatory agency and does not have regulations. The USHPA has bylaws and sop’s. Yes, membership in the USHPA is voluntary. The only regulatory agency in the United States with regard to airspace and licensing of airmen is the FAA. The regulations by FAA are manditory, Title 14, Part 103.

Law vs. Bylaw

And just what are those services which are provided to populous areas and commercial interests, to the presumed detriment of pilots like you out in the boonies? Are you not getting something that other members do?

For one, there are no commercial interests in Hang Gliding by definition. Part 103 flying is defined by the FAA as sport and recreation. There may be some in the Hang Gliding community who would like to promote the commercialism of Hang Gliding in an attempt into making it something it just is not by definition. By rule of Federal Law Commercial Hang Gliding does not exist in the United States.

What the remote Montana Hang Glider Pilot is going to get by those seeking to commercialize hang gliding is a revision of Part 103 making his flying more complicated and restrictive. It will be the same for the vast majority of the Southern California Pilots (populous areas) who follow the letter and intent of Part 103 without exemptions. They just walk off the mountain solo.

Property Liability protection for recreational users should be celebrated as an added protection in not having to use our liability insurance. The USHPA should be promoting those laws minimizing the need for additional insurance.

Michael Grisham

As the topic wound down, TJW asked a question that was never answered:

No commercial interests in recreational sports?
Are they mutually exclusive?

Jim circled back to the voting issue by quoting Alan Crouse:

If we could get the streaming thing working and had the video available to members for awhile, would that meet your goals? (No change in minutes, but members could watch the video for X months)?

I do this for a living. If USHPA will cover my travel and meals (I'll go by bus if asked) I will bring the gear to live stream on USHPA's Facebook page. If possible I can try to get permission from my employer to use their server to stream so that anyone in the world could watch. I will do this for CHEAP. I will not charge for the gear or my time. Not looking for anything other then transparency for the members. The audio portion alone will be tough to get on the air but it is also possible to do live streaming audio.

Let me know...

Red responded to Jim:

Blindrodie,

You forgot to read my answer to that bogus "streaming video" proposal. Nobody has time to watch "ten hours" (according to AlC) of streaming video, especially on Facebook (which many here will NOT use anyway). Audio only would be useless, if votes are taken by a show of hands. Paper and pencil ballots would work just fine. A video of a "show of hands" vote would work, too. The problem here is simple:

The BOD does NOT want people to know how RDs are voting. The membership may not like what they see, and start electing RDs who vote in the interests of their region, instead of unknown Special Interests.

Thank you for your generous offer, though.

Underdog thanked Michael Grisham for his excellent point:

Thanks M. Grisham excellent point

That was the end of the topic on January 6, 2018. Sam brought the discussion to the US Hawks in his earlier post to this topic:

In a discussion on recording RD votes, Red said this to Alan, about the old excuse that most of the RD votes are unanimous anyway

"If everybody agrees, then somebody is not thinking."

Read more: http://forum.hanggliding.org/viewtopic. ... z527p4weHM

You Go Red

Thanks Sam.   

[Craig Muhonen]

Bob wrote

"In fact, foolish voting decisions by both USHPA and the now-defunct HGAA were major contributing factors in the formation of the US Hawks".

USHPA is using the Little Red Book written for radicals
===================================================================================================================

These excerpts from Bob's great insight on,
"The Future of Hang Gliding" and HG.org Oct. 23rd.

red
That posting of voting records would not fix everything immediately, of course, but it would give pilots a valid basis to decide on their serving RD, and whether that person truly represents the pilots in their region.

alan
Go look at the minutes. Unanimous tells you exactly how they voted.
red
Why the ---- should we have to call or write, it should all be there in black and white.


Red
I would not re-elect that RD, because he is voting for interests that are not what his region would want. The same goes for RDs who avoid voting on important issues. I want to see the voting record, for any USHPA issues.

Msg
. Usually we arrive at a consensus, so a vote is as simple as "everybody ok with this as written?" and a bunch of nods all around. Our committee report, if it changes an SOP or otherwise requires official action, then gets approved at the general session, possibly with editing and revision.

Msg
If I feel strongly about it and think the board is really heading in the wrong direction, then sure...I'll insist on voting "no" and ask that vote to be recorded in the minutes. It rarely gets to that stage, because we manage to hash this stuff out in committee beforehand and either reach a consensus, or table it for further work.

Red
Alan, Are you not a Regional Director, AND the Vice President of USHPA?

Red
"Unanimous" does not tell people who skipped the vote by their total absence, leaving the meeting before the vote, or abstaining.

Alan
Like I said at the top. The minutes already tell you how your RD has voted. Call me this weekend and we can go through some minutes. They really are quite thorough. Remember that we agree you should be able to see how your RD voted.

Red
The Minutes that you now publish are useless for tracking the RD voting records, as the BOD desires, per the "unanimous" vote of the BOD.

Alan
Work with me here. You have a BOD member who is willing to listen but is frankly skeptical that there is a significant improvement to be made. The minutes as they exist today seem quite complete and thorough. And remember, this is all volunteer effort. Something that is 'better', as fast, and not expensive would be interesting and in keeping with positions I have brought forward in the past.

Red
This is not a trivial issue to me! What gives you the right to dictate what is important to me? Or to anybody? Publish the RD voting record!

Red
You say I can get the voting record from the minutes, and I just proved that nobody can do that. If the issue got a vote by the BOD, then it MUST BE an important issue.

Red
Please publish the RD voting record in the Minutes. We need to see if our RDs vote for their region's interests, or maybe something else. "If everybody agrees, then somebody is not thinking."

Alan
I think the USHPA BOD is evolving. The most recent example is the outreach today on proposed changes. When I joined the board, committees met the first day and formulated proposals that the board voted on the next. There had already been an effort to get the agenda items out to the membership before the meeting; but there was usually no input on specific proposals (with some notable exceptions) as they moved from committee to board overnight. Today's member e-mail reflects a determined effort to request input:
Review Proposed SOP Changes Maybe you would like to help?

Red
The pilot membership can not assess their RDs unless we know how they voted. The minutes (as noted) are clearly proven to be unclear and incomplete, as is, for RD voting. I have had an RD lie straight to my face, so asking them how they voted is not a valid approach, and they do not have time to answer every pilot on every issue, anyway. You need membership that will be growing, not leaving at every possible opportunity. You can fix this problem, but Status Quo will not help.

Alan, MSG, AIG, and others, all, "word salad" purveyors.

GO RED!

Bob said

5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."

13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. "

Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals is a 1971 book by community activist and writer Saul D. Alinsky about how to successfully run a movement for change. It was the last book written by Alinsky, and it was published shortly before his death in 1972.  His goal was to create a guide for future community organizers, to use in uniting low-income communities, or "Have-Nots", in order for them to gain by any effective, non-violent means social, political, legal, and economic power. Inside of it, Alinsky compiled the lessons he had learned throughout his experiences of community organizing from 1939 to 1971. He targeted these lessons at the current, new generation of radicals.
Divided into ten chapters, Rules for Radicals provides ten lessons on how a community organizer can accomplish the goal of successfully uniting people into an active grassroots organization with the power to effect change on a variety of issues. Though targeted at community organization, these chapters also touch on other issues that range from ethics, education, communication, and symbol construction and political philosophy.
Though published for the new generation of counterculture-era organizers in 1971, Alinsky's principles have been applied by numerous government, labor, community, and congregation-based organizations, and the main themes of his organizational methods have been recurring elements in political campaigns in recent years.

The Rules
1. "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people."
3. "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."
6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
8. "Keep the pressure on."
9. "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself. "
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."
12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. "

Alinsky's principles have been applied by numerous government, labor, community, and congregation-based organizations, and the main themes of his organizational methods have been recurring elements in political campaigns in recent years.

Alinsky's principles have been applied by numerous government, labor, community, and congregation-based organizations, and the main themes of his organizational methods have been recurring elements in political campaigns in recent years.

11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."

=========================================================================================================================

5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."

Separate note;
"Gutfeld!" should win a somekindve award for his show tonight.
watch out for those blondes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAFg-M4NdPs

Boy I'm in trouble, I married a 5' one, 47 years ago.

more
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SstxUh_yGEs


H0pinion

.

[JoeF]

For some reason the graphic seemed to fit something that is in this topic:

DeadHorseWisdom.jpg (147.31 KiB) Viewed 4093 times

[Bob Kuczewski]

For some reason the graphic seemed to fit something that is in this topic

The only problem with the "Dead Horse" theory is that it's in direct conflict with the "Determined Ram" theory:

♮ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫

Once there was a silly old ram
Thought he'd punch a hole in a dam
No one could make that ram, scram
He kept buttin' that dam

'cause he had high hopes,
he had high hopes
He had high apple pie,
in the sky hopes

So any time you're feelin' bad
'stead of feelin' sad
Just remember that ram
Oops there goes a billion kilowatt dam

There is no doubt that a sustained effort will eventually topple any dictator. After all, no one lives forever, and no one has infinite resources. There have been ongoing costs to Jack's actions. What was once a vibrant web site is now a mere shadow of its former self. He might try to blame the decline on hang gliding in general, but that decline is nowhere near proportional to the decline in participation on hanggliding.org.

[JoeF]

Maybe Ram and Dead-Horse Dismounting can play together in the broad scheme. Dismount some things and Ram other things.

[Craig Muhonen]

The RAM and the HORSE

Strongest and most brilliant in the Kingdom.

So why not team up and also become Videographers
and use rule 5 of, Rules for Radicals"

Rule five : Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Articulated ridicule is powerful
especially when well, "Videographed" and non-edited.
HG could use this against PG.
"Change my Mind" by Crowder is a great model.
Talk to the mothers.
Just sayn'


.H0

[Craig Muhonen]

2 awkward posture.png (131.11 KiB) Viewed 3925 times

ERGONOMICS:
AWKWARD POSTURE;
Awkward posture refers to positions of the body that deviate significantly from the neutral position while performing work activities.
When you are in an awkward posture, muscles operate less efficiently and you expend more force to complete the task. Examples of awkward postures are twisting, bending, reaching, pulling or lifting.
Other examples of awkward postures are working with your hands above your head, your elbows above your shoulders, working with your neck or back bent more than 30 degrees without support and without the ability to vary posture.
Maintain neutral wrist/arm postures as much as possible.

Awkward posture often stresses the spine and causes muscle fatigue and pain.

Then there's Paramotoring and Mr. Word Salad, "Tucker Gott",
promoting a most dangerous "sport" and it's illegible exhibitions.
perfect for ridicule.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Kj84siuPco



.

[Bob Kuczewski]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Kj84siuPco

Thanks Craig.  

There's a lot that can be said about that video, but I'll pass on most of it because it would take us further off-topic from "The future of hang gliding on hanggliding.org".

However, there is an aspect of that video that is directly related to hanggliding.org. At the start of the video, the speaker complains about being "de-monetized" by YouTube. I have come to the conclusion that a web site cannot serve two masters and serve either of them well. As soon as a web site brings any kind of monetization into the picture, that monetization becomes a "pull" in some direction other than the direction of the site's original purpose (unless the original purpose was just to make money). Now the amount of "pull" may be small or large, and it may vary over time and the owner's personal finances. But it is always there. It is always a vector not aligned with the site's primary purpose. It's always a temptation ("If I just ban this one guy, maybe more people will visit", "If I just discourage criticism of USHPA, maybe they'll link to my site", "If I just write more about topic X, maybe it will appeal to more people").

They say that money is the root of all evil. I don't think that's completely true, but money is a vector that's not always aligned with one's greatest potential to do good.

[JoeF]

To celebrate Colver Skysail today, I thought I'd try to join Jack's forum again. I did join, but as yet I do not see any of my previous posts there. I posted in an extant topic about Frank's Skysail, and then I started a new topic concerning One-Meter Pack Hang Glider Club.