Scrumpot

And that is in fact, what I think DID happen in this case! However, this case also was not IMO an RSL "issue" at all. The issue in this example instead was an instance where this jumper did not COMPLETE HER CUT-AWAY PULL (and never did). The RSL never became invovled. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I disagree. ...And yes, Ron & I have "debated" as well before. Agree with his position or not, an unbiased review of this thread shows his posts instead to ask clearly considered, thought-provocative, appropriately probing questions. IMHO only those intimidated b/c of either the weakness of their own positions, or their own lack of FULL consideration(s) given to same, consider his POINT MAKING to be "arguing". Smarten up gentlemen. There is a difference between argument and debate. The latter I find personally, stimulating. You are of course entitled to your own perspective(s), which is however IMHO, self-evidentiary as to the strengths (or weaknesess as the case may be) of your own convictions. Why bother continually typing then and "responding" if you think that nothing is being said? "Arguing for the sake of arguing" is someone who states one thing as fact, only to be PROVEN debunked, but then continues with ANOTHER (tangent) "yeah, but"... I don't see that this has happened here (on EITHER of your sides). Why does there always seem to need to be such animosity with "disagreement"? Isn't it okay to disagree? And especially when it comes to a PERSONAL PREFERENCE CHOICE issue? I have long had a personal saying which guides me in this regard.... If 2 people are in the same room CONSTANTLY AGREEING with each other on EVERYTHING ...Then clearly, ONE OF THEM IS ENTIRELY UNNECESSARY!! Blue Skies Gentlemen, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

It seems like you've got a pretty good head on your shoulders over this stuff, and I admire already how you have withstood the "flames". I'll have to admit I was one of the ones who imediately had thought to myself: "geesh, what was this kid so worried about just a main flap being open?" -However, I did not post this "immediate" thought, because it did not seem like it (in of itself) would be constructive. After having read through some of these posts now, and the EXPERIENCES & thoughts of others, even with something which on the surface of it may seem just so "simple" (and maybe just so quickly as a result thereby dismissed as trivial) as this for some of us more "experienced", STILL has now given me a deeper perspective from which to consider & approach these matters as well. That's the beauty of having these forums IMHO. ---If you "LISTEN" you can almost always learn something new! As far as advice seeking, it can be a "trap". Seems like you've considered this from the proper perspective as well. What just frets me is the noob jumper down the DZ looking simply to "justify" his thoughts & desires to for example, downsize quicker than his abilities. Unfortunately I've SEEN way too much of that (and just recently it seems). He'll go around from JM to JM, "friend to friend" etc. asking "what do you think of me jumping this XXX super-hanky?" Even to get 9-10 answers in a row: "that's beyond your ability right now" only to come across ONE PERSON who says "you should be okay with that" ---and BAM! ---Re-affirmation! ...That's now ALL he's heard! Just didn't want to see you (not knowing you) fall into that "trap" is all. Keep the good head on your shoulders, LISTEN, but then CONSIDER too. Again, sometimes the advice you get might not go so directly with your pre-conceived notions sometimes (just like mine on YOUR situation ). But when FULLY CONSIDERED, it may be the best advice you're actually receiving. Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Wow, now there's a "please EVERYBODY" attempt ...or maybe the inverse, not offend anybody stab at this one eh? Well, bzzzzzzt ...argh! -Sorry, but I just don't agree with this AT ALL. I see absolutely no value whatever in INSISTING that EVERY student MUST do their first jump as a tandem! Any more than INSISTING on SL, or AFF, or IAD for that matter. Although each of these methods have their own independent merits (and definciencies perhaps) Having the ability to offer the program that BEST SUITS an INDIVIDUALS (read: variable) particular needs, and best adept individual learning STYLE, and having that optionality AVAILABLE imho is the best of ALL these worlds! Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

This is good, and in this case the "support" and observations given appear to be appropriate as well. However, just one more word of advise ...Just basing it upon your exuberant response: Be careful in just seeking out (and accepting) advice that merely "SUPPORTS" your feelings or position. I've seen this happen way too often recently in this sport. Often times it is the advice you DON'T like to hear that can still be the most valuable to you in reality. Just a word to the wise. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

This sounds like the post of somebody who is planning to run for office someday? ...Any aspirations there, Sky? hmmmm.... ? Do tell. -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Chances are, that under THIS scenario, once the reserve has inflated and you are now vertical in attitude, if the pin now somehow did either fall out or get pulled (if PC drag force was insufficient at terminal, it certainly now is going to be much less once UNDER your reserve) ...Most likely the d-bag is instead going to merely drop out of the container, rather than pull to line-stretch & begin to inflate. I have actually seen this happen just this way too, BTW. I am for "if you KNOW you have pitched something" then don't take the time second guessing it... Pull cut-away, pull Silver. If on the other hand you KNOW you have put NOTHING into the wind (like an unfind-able hackey buried into the spandex) then go straight to Silver. There's pro's & con's to differing opinions & this one is just mine. Personal decision (thought out in ADVANCE) based upon weighing risk/reward consequences & potentialities scenarios (and personal gear/configuration choices too) that go along with that. My .02 BSBD, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Hmmm.... Is Aggie Dave "coming of age"? I'm thinking now of starting a thread: Aggie Dave Matures! ...Read all about it! Saliency in all of us from time to time it seems, rears it's ugly head! ---Keep on thinkin' & keep that mind a workin' bro. Let me know when you see yourself approaching any conclusions from all this. BS, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

43:36 ...Help any? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Then indeed, I agree ...that person DID get involved. (in SOME way). We are on the same page. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Sure, just ERASE this thread though & "make it so"! None of "US" would have ever noticed any difference anyways. Why "publicize" it? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I wouldn't have even "publicized" that. ANyone can register for a day, with ANY type of (even "BS") info, can they not? I'd just let that be a known fact for us registerd users. F... the "interlopers"! My .02 coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I think some people might REALLY FOOL YOU. ...And no, I don't think we are on the same page with that. There are a couple of really "popular" BOD members, that given the right set of circumstances and open doors of opportunity, I think might really (and potentially) surprise you. That is the danger though. Neither you, or I, can really until it is inevitably too late, ever REALLY KNOW. And right now unfortunately, we just DON'T (this is a fact upon which I think we all agree) have the appropriate protections in place to pre-empt such real possibility. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Thanks Jan, yet again for being so responsive! As we've discussed now in several different arena's, the one thing I have learned from this entire experience is that there are indeed a FEW of us who have honorable intentions for what USPA represents, is now, and what it CAN BE (or potentially evolve to -or NOT) in the future. I do believe you are one of those people. Unfortunately, there also may be a FEW of us with somewhate less than fully honorable intents, or at the very least more individualistically "personal" agenda's let's say, that they may wish to further ply. If this scenario indeed DOES play out as you describe, IMHO the MEMBERS (each and every INDIVIDUAL who did NOT get involved -in SOME way) has nobody else to blame or then further "grouse" about (or to) but THEMSELVES! On that note, I will again simply drop back into the shadows (as if I ever really emerged from them! ) ...and go right on back to just skydiving with my "family". No matter how dysfunctional (or again as I assert -yes, I still do Jim assert, with limited few exceptions: APATHETIC) most of them may be. Blue Skyz all. I now return you to your regularly scheduled talk-back hodge-podge of dead kittens, man-eating penis' and other various assundry of "Most Entertaining" (to plagerize a term) topics posted. Apologies for the interuption. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

That just does not make any sense, Jim. Aren't you thereby subrogating precisely what VOTING, and more generally the democratic process then in of itself should be all about? By handcuffing the very system so as to totally PRECLUDE even the possibilty for any change (or improvement), I still submit THAT by it's very definition is a system which is BROKE, and thereby inevitably doomed to total & utter failure. It's just a matter of time (on it's current "status quo" course)! I do still think that we have an avenue by which to "FIX" it now, and further, that we should. Anything short of that is simply defeatist attitude IMHO. -And a self-fulfilling prophecy. Edited to correct silly, simple doofus spelling errors! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Okay then, where you won't "bite", here is what I thought might be a possible idea to get the system out of this apparent conundrum.... Have it written that ONLY those motions as PREVIOUSLY set (and disclosed) within the agenda may be voted on at any given GMM. Further, that any & all motions must be proffered to (and placed upon) the agenda within a reasonable pre-meeting time frame (say no closer than 30 days) in order to be validly VOTED upon (for final passage). This, to me I think could possibly solve BOTH sides of the equation, and maybe restore some confidence in our board & their processes. (?) If you review NY NCPL you will note that there ALREADY IS a provision for agenda notifications to be provided by no later than within 30 days of the scheduled meeting. The way I read it, your objections/concerns (and not invalid one's at that -we AGREE!) are for those items that could come up AT THE MEETING as unknowns (once a quorum is established of course). -Motions that would be proffered then PASSED right then & there ON THE SPOT without any further effective membership say, input or prior review. This can most certainly be quite consistent with addressing that. ...Would something like this quell individual members fears/concerns? #1. You would still need a quorum (10% of the membership) in order to effectuate a VOTE (and then ONLY upon items which were KNOWN FULLY in advance) at the meeting. then... #2. Any new motions brought then at that meeting to the table could NOT be voted upon for potential enactment until the NEXT scheduled meeting. Giving EVERYBODY fair chance & provision to review, debate, then final decide as should be. What then would you think of something like that? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Although it is conceivable, ...heck maybe even downright likely that once the quorum was established, that further motions (outside of the 3 specific ammendment proposals) may be made & maybe even raised to a vote. However, if you had given your proxy to SOMEONE YOU TRUST, and had REPRESENTATION AT THE MEETING, then this would be fully appropriate & in effect YOU COULD STILL VOTE (through your proxies) on that matter. Again, with NO QUORUM there was still NO BUSINESS even POSSIBLE, as a result; and I submit that this indeed was a failure. I never completely advocated that everybody send in their proxies as proffered by the USPA to either "the board" or the "USPA President" (as it was worded) either. However, I was trying (maybe too hard) to not take up an adversarial stance with ANYBODY relative to their potential positions in that regard. So if you feel you can not gain APPROPRIATE representation (either in person or by proxy) to effectuate APPROPRIATE vote(s) -as you see them, what then is the answer to this dilemma? Surely it can NOT just continue to be "block all further business" NO FURTHER BUSINESS, or NO FURTHER CHANGES/IMPROVEMENTS/VOTES to our organization's governing bi-laws EVER! I understand what was being said by the "statement". This is clearly a "broken system" then though (if you buy into that statement it can NEVER work then, right?). So what do you propose to fix it, other than continue down this path of "non-action"? ....which yet again I still continue to submit is NOT a "success"! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Clicky----->http://www.artbeel.com/jack_schitt.html coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I love your avatar, Casie! ...That is a LIVE kitten though now, isn't it? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Thank you everybody, for not having made me simply DEPRESSED after coming off a weekend of jumping only to find several new "incidents" (injuries/fatalities) in the INCIDENTS forum!!

I don't entirely disagree there Andy... Only problem is, that as is, unfortunately, the "joke" ends up in the long run really, as being on ALL OF US! If it really is just such a joke, as you say; What do you propose then, to effectively change that? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I would have been just as happy Jim, to take as many proxies as anybody would have been willing to give with "NO" votes affixed to 'em too. The fact is that without a quorum, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING get's done. NO BUSINESS at the meeting can transact whatsoever (new motions brought forward, debated then added to potential FUTURE meeting's agenda's, etc.) either. No sir, this was NOT a "success", by ANY stretch of the imagination. I submit not even for your position either. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

You are unfortunately correct Dave, and in fact no business whatsoever took place at the GMM. After over 3 hours of driving in BRUTAL DC/N.VA rush-"hour" traffic & finally arriving there myself @ 20 minutes late, it turned out to be instead a total BUST! In fact, I arrived with my GRAND TOTAL of only 8 proxies (and 5 of those 8 from OUTSIDE of ANY "postings") really just in time to witness only the board having nothing else to do but recess to the bar. One side benefit though (for me) personally was meeting some of these people you only really see in Skydiving and Parachutist magazines & getting to sit relaxed, with absolutely no agenda & have a beer (or 2) with some of 'em. Thank you to those of you who actually did take the MINIMAL enough time & miniscule needed effort to actually CARE & who sent in (in one form or another) those proxies. You know who you are. To those of you who didn't... ...Well, I just do not know how to even begin to address the clearly apparent APATHY that our "community" seems to suffer from. I do sincerely hope that one day a situation does NOT arise that as one member of the board relayed to me as their observation/experience, that according to them the ONLY catalyst possible in their opinion, to get sufficient #'s of jumpers involved in ANYTHING would be only if it involved an overt threat of impairing the enormous freedoms we all currently enjoy (for the most part) in jumping as, and whenever we want. "Start to take away some of their freedoms & abilities to jump: then, and ONLY THEN will you see jumpers/members all of a sudden get involved." My .02 to that: We all need to be involved NOW. If that someday ever did come, IMHO a slow-to respond, merely reactionary involvement just AINT GONNA CUT IT people. This "experience" has indeed sobered me somewhat. Oh well, I can always just get out there & jump - Right? (which I did, both Saturday & Sunday BTW -Yeeha!

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=561385;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread And let's people get some more proxies in!!! Remember, I am HAND CARRYING THEM as recieved by FAX to ANYBODY who you know will be at the meeting for you (including the USPA one to the president, Glen Bangs)! Fax #: 410-715-3484 Attn: Grant Your proxy does not have to be to ME Even send me your USPA one. I am going to the meeting and merely willing to HAND CARRY, and thereby DELIVER yours for you. Don't miss out. BE HEARD! Fax your USPA proxy NOW! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Only 3 more hours, then I'm ON THE ROAD! Anyone else wanna get their proxy in to the USPA meeting???? Bump, ditty, bump, bump, bump! coitus non circum - Moab Stone