Homer Allman

When they answer my question. I will announce my intentions.

stevenmichael

iTrader: (35)

thats you reaction not theirs.

Homer Allman

I'm sorry for asking more questions than they could handle on the ROAR forums. How's that?

stevenmichael

iTrader: (35)

why wait?
the question has been answered
steven

stevenmichael

iTrader: (35)

you asked the same question a 100 different ways with the same answer everytime,you kept going hoping to get the answer you wanted to hear.
its the same thing my 5 year old does when he wants a toy or whatever keeps going hoping to hear the answer he wants
steven

stevenmichael

iTrader: (35)

and with the above statement you wonder why you were called a jerkoff?
i hope you realize you have shot your boat so full of holes that your nomination will go straight down the crapper.
who is going to want to help you when they see that if you dont get your way you go around bad mouthing them?

Homer Allman

They never said if I eligible or not. Not even once.

Homer Allman

If I ask it 100 different ways. What was the question? I forgot already, refresh me please. It should be easy with over a 100 different ways. I bet you can nail one of them down.

stevenmichael

iTrader: (35)

they didnt themselves but if im not mistaken two other people did,why should they hold your hand you can read the bylaw change the same as everyone else and know exactly what you need to do to be nominated

jamescam

iTrader: (10)

Here is some sound advice. If opposition states they have received threatening phone calls a response of "prove it" is not only immature it is callous and paints a bad picture of the debator. A statement such as "It's unfortunate that members of this forum believe invading someone's personal life is an appropriate course of action and I would hope both sides of this debate can be better dignified in voicing their opposition. I do feel strongly that this should not distract from the following issues with ROAR".

I'm more neutral than Sweden on the problem with ROAR because I have no idea what it is, although the Brushless thing the Trinity letter pointed out seemed very suspect. Also, I was reading something about ROAR letting a small group of manufacturers to pick which tires would be used in a certain event which begs the question: what about the small upstart rc tire company?. I think this is a great forum for getting your facts out there but if you want them to be taken seriously the method is which they are stated needs to be improved.

Finally, while I don't think name calling was called for I do think the owner of the forum showed a good level of fairness by not revoking anyone's posting rights.

Just random input from a random reader.

Homer Allman

=no one ever said it. I never read a definative anwser anywhere.
I am an assistant regional director and I have been on a committee. what more do I need to get a yes or no? I ask this question to Rick in email just minutes ago. We'll see what he says.

stevenmichael

iTrader: (35)

maybe if you had done that in the first place none of this would have happened.
steven

Jack Smash

iTrader: (35)

James - on the tire issue, several maufactures chose to use a common tire at the Nats, to reduce their costs and to reduce the costs of any racer that followed suit. Anyone that wished to use a different tire than these drivers could have.

stevenmichael

iTrader: (35)

if this was such a concern to you back in oct. why not hire an att. to get the answers you want.if your a "jerkoff" to the people your asking the questions to,do you really expect to get an answer which by the way they have answered already?

if you were one of my customers and treated me the way youve treated them i would have treated you the same.

jamescam

iTrader: (10)

See that makes sense to me, and all the more reason that both sides of issues be presented rationally for the casual observer to make their own decision. Thank you Jack.