I may as well keep rustling a few more feathers.

I'm at the understanding that a lot of clubs are voting as a committee and submitting their votes to AARCMCC, rather than go to the actual members. (Assumption)

To eliminate this and grow our sport, surely we can move this to online, (It is 2015)

It would be EXTREMELY easy and cost effective, to utilise a platform such as Survey Monkey, which has a large number of controls to monitor the authenticity of these votes, such as who opened the email, how long they viewed the email for. IP, etc etc etc. You can almost customise your own reports.

Process such as the following,

1. Registration forms are submitted to AARCMCC with persons credentials including email.

2. This is imported in to Survey Monkey, and the recording system that AARCMCC use??

3. The submission is sent out via the platform and voting commences, you put a time frame on when voting for the certain change closes, 2 - 4 weeks, and then based on the results, the submission is declined or implemented.

Surely this is the fastest way forward for "OUR" sport to grow, let's face it there are a lot of "clubs" that are "swayed" by certain individuals / shop owners. And this isn't in the best interest of "OUR" sport.

Mod, can we please put up another poll, purely a yes or no, I am loving the voting synopsis's


Nathan

PS, what's the bet the first argument I get is what about the people without email access, well if you haven't got an email address, I'm surprised you have running water A way around this is to submit a paper vote and have a one month time frame to return.

Great idea.

Less administration for the clubs as well obviously,which is a good thing seeing as it's volunteers for almost all involved.

👍👍👍👌👌👌

For any EP Offroad vote we use google forms which is an easy way for clubs to respond to a vote. I also publish any vote to clubs on facebook so members of affiliated clubs are informed a vote has been sent to the club contact.

AARCMCC is an association of clubs not individuals so all votes go out to club contacts provided on the AARCMCC member form.

The main point I'm making is, AARCMCC's members are clubs, not individual racers. This means member clubs vote on rule changes. So follow up your respective committee's to make sure your voice is being heard when a vote is on.

Thanks
Michael
AARCMCC President/EP Offroad

Bad idea.

You go to the racers you get populist voting results that don't reflect due diligence.

Racers have responsibility to themselves only. Club committees have a responsibility to all their members and their club's constitution (not just the majority).

The equivalent would be holding a referendum every time we wanted to pass a new law in Australia.

Perhaps I'm barking up the wrong tree, and thanks for clarifying Michael, I wasn't across how that worked.

Perhaps we need to look at the clubs having an online / open voting structure??

And member clubs of the AARCMCC must abide by the constitution of the AARCMCC, not just their own club constitution, as pointed out by Radio Active.

The constitution of a club, or an association, is a legal document. It is basically, the rule book for the administration of the club or association.

Things like which class to race, or whether the canteen stocks Pepsi or Coke isn't part of the constitution, as such, but, the process, in which to decide, is, and therefore, must be respected.

The same thing applies to the AARCMCC and it's constitution, Pepsi or Coke?, take it to the clubs for a vote.

Disagree... It has long been the exact way the BRCA votes. Racers understand that on their head be it decisions are made. Hence a few years ago the dropping of the mod class... lo and behold next year it was back when they realised it was a bad idea. Clubs are removed from that process, quite simply as it is too clunky, limited catchement, and racers often feel put out when a club votes a different opinion too themselves.

Give the racers the option to make the decisions, and you'll get a fairer reflection of what people actually want. How many actually on a club committee at the moment actually, hand on heart, know what the guys running at their clubs would like to race?

I know you'll come back that clubs should hold votes on the topics at hand, but truthfully... I've not once yet been consulted by any club committee member on any Arrcmacc votes, and there's your flaw in the system right there. Personally, I would be all for a constitutional change on this matter.

More on that last point, the ONLY vote I have ever been a part of, was the removal of 17.5 booted, 2 years ago. You can't tell me that has been the Only RULE submission in the past 2-3 years in EP ONR??

Weather this direction is the right way or not, we can at least IMPROVE upon our current communication methods.

Surely no one will disagree that AARCMCC are still working with idea's and methods from the 80s and 90s.

And it's for this very reason series like ETS and EOS, are the "PREMIER" events and not any that is ifmar / aarcmcc related. It's only a matter of time before the same thing in Australia happens, with the following of the ETS rules.

KISS "Keep it simple stupid" is what we need to be doing to improve our sport.

What Michael Toms has been doing with off road appears to have helped a lot in this regard.

Letting racers know what is being voted on ie making them public has engaged the average racers so that they are at least speaking to there club committees.

I think that was the last rule proposal that was submitted for a vote.

I was told on Friday night that WSRC, has submitted multiple, only for nothing to ever happen, or pass thorough.

Totally agree with this, and certainly a step in the right direction. I have read through the Offroad thread on occasion... and the transparency in the how that section operates is certainly something other sections need to emulate.

+1 I don't haver much faith in our section head, and i assume I speak for the majority here.

What I'd love to see perhaps an AARCMCC Australia page, and all sections are covered in there. I have suggested this to Michael, however understand he looks after off road too if I'm not mistaken?

If you haven't been consulted by your club committee then that is a failure of your club, not of AARCMCC.

The procedure followed at Maitland was that all AARCMCC proposals were posted on the club website, and members invited to call or write to the committee to express their view. The amount of feedback we got depended upon how interesting the rule change was to the racing population.

An example of how the populist position doesn't work was when discussing dropping the weight limit in TC. Every submission we got but one (and we got more than a dozen of them), basically read, "I can/can't make my car lighter, so I vote yes/no." Only one person was the least bit concerned about the potential future ramifications for the sport.

Do you think that if the BRCA didn't have decisions made by populist racer vote that they would have dropped Mod? Clearly it was a terrible decision, disastrous for the UK at Euro and Worlds level, anyone in the sport for a significant length of time could have told you that up front. Instead, racers in the UK had to learn the hard way.

Thing is, at any given time, half the people in this sport are brand new. You give them the opportunity to influence the big decisions by voting on their phone without serving an apprenticeship, and you're opening the sport up to more of these ill-informed calls.

The number of times I've seen people newer to RC administration make suggestions that have been tried and failed is astonishing. They make these suggestions with no knowledge of how things have worked in the past, why they've worked or why they haven't. After spending a few years in committee positions they begin to learn because the others around them are able to communicate these things over time.

It's up to individual clubs how they make decisions, but the best calls IMO are made by smaller groups of people who've taken the time to investigate the ramifications of a proposal. These things can't be thrashed out in 5 minutes at a drivers' meeting.