DSE

Not electing them to those position because they are LDS would be discrimination. They're not elected. They're appointed. Interesting that Utah has a low drunk driving/alcohol related record while these beverages have been allowed on the shelves since day one, and of course, our famous 3.2 beer is always available on the shelves. Of course, that goes without mentioning that of the Utah residents (predominantly Mormon), 54% of those surveyed were OPPOSED to restricting sales. The beverages are the same alcohol content as our beer, so it's a fairly stupid action, IMO.

This link has pictures along with commentary.

LDS Church makes statement against alcohol in grocery stores "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons) has long supported the state of Utah alcohol control philosophy that alcohol be made reasonably available to responsible adults. The church agrees with the position of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission and the attorney general that the sale of distilled spirits - including so-called alcopops - should be restricted to state liquor stores. To allow the sale of distilled spirits in grocery and convenience stores promotes underage drinking and undermines the state system of alcohol control. Utah can justifiably take pride in its low rates of per capita consumption of alcohol and its low incidence of drunk driving. The resulting lower social costs from alcohol abuse are a benefit to all Utahns." - LDS Church spokesman Mark Tuttle Just a small amount of background; 2 of the 3 people on the ABC are LDS. It's been a long-running joke in Utah about having non-drinkers on the Alcohol and Beverage Commission. I wonder when cough syrup will end up in the State Liquor store?

Gary, We used your Round Parachute calculation for students to drop their favorite action figures, both for accuracy and speed. it was a fun experiment that kept the kids busy for 3 days.

Yes, I can. I did not begin the day yesterday with that opinion. I'm uncomfortable with my opinion now, but believe it's the appropriate opinion. Regardless of how/why USPA was being sued by Skyride, how USPA got into that position; nothing should have been said from a position of authority against Skyride during or after litigation if a standard order of confidentiality was placed on it. IMO, Jan would have been, and still could be much more effective in the fight by stepping aside from USPA and continuing the fight on an individual platform vs on the USPA platform. It's not uninteresting that it's often posted in the Incidents forum that posters need to be cautious of what is said, as it may be used by the family of the deceased to sue a DZ, pilot, manufacturer, whomever, but for whatever reason, that same prudence isn't being recognized in this very similar situation. If a perceived Expert in our sport posts that "XXX died because of stainless RSL," then it must be so, because Expert with 6000 jumps says so, providing a perfect affidavit for an attorney. Wouldn't one imagine that a posting by a member of the BOD carries the same weight, if not greater weight? I'm not excited about understanding the process that brought me to a different conclusion than I'd begun my day with, but after careful consideration, I think it's the correct one. However, I'm not on the BOD and therefore cannot vote, so my opinion isn't worth the time it took you to read my post.

Exactly. Look at dozens if not more past threads where it's said "XXXX did this, and that bastard is a RD" or "XXX did that and he's on the EC..." BOD members have a responsibility to the organization, and they're held to a different standard than you or I. As a member of any administrative body, words in any direction carry significantly more weight than they do when spoken by a layperson. Who has more credibility being interviewed about a stock scandal, Joe Schmoe, stockholder/janitor? Or Winston Cartwright, Senior Vice President at Berkshire-Hathaway? After all, both are stockholders in the company, just as we're all "stockholders" in USPA. I'm not a spokesperson for the organization. Therefore I'm not hostage to any responsibility to the organization. Were I elected to wear the badge, I'd be responsible to the greater good of the organization, and any personal issues I might have must be shelved. If I couldn't shelve those issues, I'd expect myself to step down/aside.

It's easy to ignore ethic vs legal, but in the real world, they're not far apart. Unethical=fired, impeached, removed, terminated Illegal=fired, impeached, removed, terminated, possibly jailed and/or severely fined. On the subject of hypotheticals... If a member of a governing body unwittingly provided confidential and damaging information to the oposing attorney during litigation or settlement negotiation, should it be considered unethical, illegal, both, or neither?

Could they even legally do that since she is an elected by us, the members, without disclosing the terms of the settlement? When they impeached Clinton, we all knew why. ? No, they could not make impeachment part of a settlement. Not legally, not ethically, not otherwise. No one can guarantee a majority vote in favor of impeachment. Which is why, IMO, the tone of this thread might serve everyone if the emotional BS went away and discussion of how to best respond as a community. Threats and name-calling generally aren't heard as well as a coalition of similar voices with a rational position. Thanatos has a pretty good grip on it, I'd like to hear his suggestions.

*said with respect* Pussy Jealous?

Doesn't matter if the camera is PAL or NTSC, inside the only difference is the imager and clock. Any camcorder that has a D link on it will work. Start/Stop are but two of the expanded functions of this really cool concept that all the cool cats will want/need. price, TBD, but skydiver-affordable. Maybe we can get whuffo's to foot a bigger part of the bill. Durability, more durable than LANC, IMO. shipping...can't say. I know, but can't say. they're holding my SCARLET hostage if I tell.

Gary, my only response to that then, is that I recently ordered "techsupport@vasst.com" to be disconnected, because it had become a serious spam magnet with significant impact on productivity at our business. We did not mail our software owners with the new tech support email, we merely changed it on our website. Does this mean I didn't want to hear from my customers? Nope, quite the opposite. I wanted to cut the BS. We're a little more tech savvy than most of the BOD, based on what I've observed from them, so I find it difficult to jump to the conclusion that the email addy was discontinued simply because the "BOD didn't want to hear from members." If there were *any* evidence of a BOD member making such a stupid statement, they should be brought up short in public, immediately. All the more reason I'm in favor of BOD meetings being viewable live over the web. All these accusations, but no accountability on either side makes for a mess. Make everyone accountable for their actions, and responsible for their statements and votes.

[replyWhy don't I just send an e-mail to the whole board and ask them what the reason was, maybe they'll all give us the same legitimate reason why that e-mail address was removed. Oh, wait, I can't. What, in your opinion, would be a source that was trustworthy enough to make a determination if that above statment is true or not? Of course you can email the entire board. I've done it a few times. And gotten decent responses from a few of them, zero responses from others (yeah, I think they're dicks for not responding, and yes, I highly respect those that have). Is it really so hard to click a few names? CRTL + C and CTRL + V. That's all it takes. Or APPLE +C/Apple +V if you use a Mac. Or create a custom email addy in Outlook. Or copy/paste this page No. The word of one sitting BOD member isn't enough to convince me that the reason the email was disconnected was because "the board didn't want to hear from their constituents." Logic applies: If you don't accept what Glenn Bangs (or any other disfavored BOD member) then why should *anyone's* individual word be accepted? The whole alleged point of the impeachment action is due at least in part, to what one BOD member said without authorization from the others. Is the word of only one BOD member the word of the BOD, or of an individual? I'm merely attempting to remain fair based on what appear to be constantly changing rules of engagement. How is it that *this* BOD member's word isn't acceptable but *that* BOD member's word isn't? Either it's all accepted or none of it is, IMO. Can't pick n' choose. Either way, I'm not willing to go off cocked n' locked based on the very flimsy amount of information currently available. As on person so eloquently put it in a private mail "I'm too new to know the history behind all of this." Guilty!. I'm also not naive about the politics of large representational organizations and have seen more than one situation explode due to lack of information, and felt like a fool for being on a bandwagon with only 3 wheels. So forgive me for wanting to be open-minded for the time being. I'm funny that way.

See now that right there pisses me off.. They are supposed to be representing THE MEMBERS...and that includes listening to WE THE MEMBERS. Same question as asked above. What evidence do you have that the email address was removed for the reason cited above? If it's true, it's wrong. But is it true? Cite the source.

because we lost. okay then, we will hold them all accountable. You might want to tell some presidents that. Have you ever been to a USPA board meeting? judy

There is quite a discussion on this in the Canon Photo forums with the problem stemming from heat, not cold, but the posted images there are identical to what you describe. If it's the same thing, plan on sending your camera to Canon if it's warranted, and there is a hack on that website (will violate warranty) by putting the cam in AE mode and manually flipping the mirror up a couple times. Seems to have worked for more than one person.

Well, lets see....First we LOST the suit with skyride and if I recall correctly Glenn's visit the Pennridge dz didn't help the situation out any. Glenn is the president of the USPA executive committee. I hold him accountable. J What evidence is there that Glenn (or anyone else) mishandled the Skyride issue? In other words, an absence of facts doesn't make conjecture accurate, does it? I'd truly like to know. USPA-bashing is popular, but I've yet to see facts that actually merit the very personal accusations made against the BOD. And the same holds true for whatever reason the USPA may have for intitiating impeachment proceedings against Jan or anyone else on the BOD. If you hold Glenn responsible as president of the executive committee, then you must also hold Jay, B.J., Jan, Sherry, Scott, Lee accountable as well. The president doesn't have absolute authority. By the same token, someone will have to present evidence (not opinion) of wrongdoing on Jan's (or Glenn's) part in order to successfully conclude impeachment proceedings against anyone. It's easy to become emotional in the absence of facts, which is why our system *generally* works pretty well, because it makes an attempt to put emotions aside. One argument always wins, another loses. Being on one side or another doesn't have to always equate to "mishandling." I for one, would like facts or more information about why Glenn (or anyone else) feels this is an appropriate course of action. As to why it's on the agenda...well...that's how Robert's Rules function. Anyone in an organized environment understands this.

What evidence is there that Glenn (or anyone else) mishandled the Skyride issue?

Kidding or not, your post is worrisome.

I'd assume he jumped from a window below the net. The net is fairly high up on many buildings with public access, to prevent people from tossing things over and hitting pedestrians. The netting we had to mask out for shooting was mesh fence with a thick plastic mesh over top of it, tied down with zip ties every so many inches. You can see it if you look up at the building with binoculars or a good zoom lens, it's not far beneath the observation deck. Small side note; we were shooting for a documentary and had part of a street closed off, and quickly learned that dropping a penny from the top of a skyscraper will not penetrate much of anything. You'd think we'd have known that, but myths die hard. I still think Jeb shoulda Tase'd em'.

This is a typical action from a corporate perspective, and once emotions are removed from the discussion, it is fairly prudent. Do you know it's a "they" vs a "he" or "her?" From what I've read here it seems to be proposed by one. Perhaps the board hasn't been given a reason either. In other words, it's an item that as part of the by-laws, must be on the published agenda in order to be heard. Apparently one person promoted it from an idea to an action item on the agenda. Somewhere, the reasoning will be made public at some point. Not defending USPA, I admire Jan tremendously for what she brings to the table and has fought for on a variety of fronts, and I'm probably the least knowledgeable of all the history in this community. she's also helped me in a couple of situations. But...USPA is not entirely unique from a corporate org chart, and the rules for these meetings are fairly set in stone. It's required to be on the public agenda for this very reason; it allows those that will be voting to look to their resources, invites commentary through appropriate channels, etc. I've sent my RD an email, I'd recommend anyone interested in the outcome of the agenda do the same. Phone calls are nice, but emails can be verified, printed, and shared verbatim.

JT, I don't see the safety fence that's installed below that ledge/patio area? In addition to clearing that ledge, there is also a 12' safety net around the perimeter of the widest portion of the building. Or at least was there 18 months ago when we shot some footage there. It'll be interesting to see how Jeb's lawsuit pans out, given that while he was trespassing, his life wasn't really in danger until security messed with his life-saving equipment.

Not to mention that the DV cam is programmed to not pass vid if it detects CSS or Macrovision. There are methods of getting around it, but the best result is when a program like DVDRip is used. Or, if you have a cheap TBC, you can sometimes work around copy encoding.

I'll be there, whether I'm cleared to fly or not. Be fun jumping w/you, Mike. JT, you owe me one

Avoid sending it to Sony service in Texas....but as Phil mentioned, have you tried connecting it to power? Removed internal battery to reset? Barring those two things, look for repair near you. I used to have a place to send the small cams (broadcast repair) but they've closed up shop.

Ooh...I see a product in development here: The BASE'R, 50,000 volts of incapacitating electricity guaranteed to repel potential saviours of BASE jumpers. Comes in Urban Camo or Blue Jean Patterns. Order now from Hasbro. One has to wonder if this will have any significant impact on how BASE is viewed by the outside world.