Jump to content

IOMICA AGM


Recommended Posts

IOM Skippers, the Agenda for the forthcoming IOMICA AGM is available on both the IOM GBR Class website http://www.gbriom.wordpress.com/2016/12/14/iomica-agm-2// and IOMICA website http://www.iomclass.org

There are a couple of motions to vote on, a discussion paper on these motions is attached to the AGM agenda which give further explanation from IOMICA.

Details on how these motions will be voted on will be posted on the IOM GBR class website, the MYA website and this forum thread in due course.

I'd suggest that any questions relating to the motions or agenda are best discussed on this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having just read the addendum to the I0MICA AGM Agenda I am somewhat shocked to read of moves to actually reduce entry numbers for Championships. Having been out of Radio Yacht racing for around eighteen years it has been interesting to see how things have moved on: fleets have increased in size, facilitated by improvements in Radio Control technology - yet someone wants to reduce numbers permitted to sail. The potential publicity impact of twenty or more yachts on the water at once must be so much more than when we were limited to a dozen or so. The development of HMS - it is humbling to see one's name in the small print of the spreadsheet info - has helped to manage the big fleets effectively, perhaps it could be taken further. Image an event where the lovely lake has a pontoon or breakwater stretching out: either side of the projection is a radio yacht racing course. On one side, call it South, the H heat is just starting while on the other, call it North, the D heat is in progress including 6 skippers who have just finished in the previous E heat on the South side. Think what a spectacle that would provide for the media to watch: think of the exercise skippers would get; the control system would display the 'heat boards' on a monster digital display which would update as each heat is completed. The logic currently woven into the HMS workbook could, perhaps should, be reconstructed in a proper database form - from there the sky is the limit. Should we really be writing specific entry limits into the rules?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My view is that all current interpretations should be subject to the existing Regulation 9.1, and should not be moved to Q and A. The interpretations have already become part of the class rules. If they have not been formally "written" into the class rules then this is only because Regulation 9.1 made this unnecessary.

If Regulation 9.1 is to be changed, than this change should only apply to future interpretations.

Existing interpretations (or at the very least, interpretations made prior to 1st October 2014 ) are now part of the rules, as this is what the class rules stated, irrespective of any agreement made on 1st October 2014.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Voting on the motions for the forthcoming IOMICA AGM is now open.

For details on how to vote please follow the link to the GBR IOM website https://gbriom.wordpress.com/2016/12/31/iomica-agm-motions

Voting on last years motions was terribly supported with 38 Votes or a 3% turnout, either way a poor effort.

With the help of the MYA communications team we have an easy to use web form in which owners can make a considered vote.

These motions are important, please take the time to vote.

Voting will close on 15/1/2017.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My view is that all current interpretations should be subject to the existing Regulation 9.1, and should not be moved to Q and A. The interpretations have already become part of the class rules. If they have not been formally "written" into the class rules then this is only because Regulation 9.1 made this unnecessary.

If Regulation 9.1 is to be changed, than this change should only apply to future interpretations.

Existing interpretations (or at the very least, interpretations made prior to 1st October 2014 ) are now part of the rules, as this is what the class rules stated, irrespective of any agreement made on 1st October 2014.

 

Isnt the proposal that the rules changes are being made as a housekeeping exercise, and the Q&A being their to understanding the reasoning behind the changes. Surely if you don't do this housekeeping periodically the whole thing becomes very difficult for the newcomer to understand as they don't know which parts have interpretations or not? Presumably you could end up with the situation that an interpretation gets superseded by a further interpretation and confusion follows.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I like HMS and think it is a good system, for all the reasons we know about, therefore i see it quite honest that as a GBR skipper i vote to keep it as the favoured scoring system, although i suspect others may differ and other countries that have less knowledge of it may vote for the system that use and understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Darin

No this is not housekeeping. This is rule changing dressed up as housekeeping. The proposal indicates that current interpretations that should automatically be part of the rules, will now, retrospectively, be treated as being expired.

The correct "housekeeping" process should be first to update the rules to include the valid interpretations that are now automatically part of the current rules, and then apply the proposed rule change (about how interpretations are dealt with) to future interpretations, if this is approved by the voting members.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IOM ICA VC Technical Robert Grubiša has provided answers on comments on the IOMICA motions from the MYA technical team.

Robert's answers can be found either on the GBR IOM website http://www.gbriom.wordpress.com/2016/12/31/iomica-agm-motions/

or a direct link to the document provided by Robert https://gbriom.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/iom-ica-vc-techn-answers-on-gbr-nca-comments.pdf

Please could all skippers read all of the info in full prior to voting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will confess to being totally amazed by the lack of comment and debate regarding the proposed changes to the Class Rules.

What has taken place is by no means a housekeeping exercise as someone put it.

And Richard Wills is absolutely correct in this observation.

Regrettably Robert's answers are totally irrelevant- It is that what is written / published that will become the the Class Rules not the Intention

or what was intended to be written


As I posted on the IOMIC site

Someone has clearly put a lot of work into the project thus far but it is by no means complete and should NOT be adopted simply out of expediency.

The rule amendment, particularly in the area of sails has become even more fragmented than it was before.

All quite unnecessary in my opinion as in reality nothing has actually changed but the Class Rules become harder to read and understand.

This preoccupation with how shape is induced into a sail is ridiculous. -

The section on radio link is totally unnecessary specifically disallowing video telemetry – it belongs in Appendix E of the RRS

I would urge all to vote NO for no other reason that the job is not by any means complete and clearly has not be properly reviewed before publication.

By all means change the IRSA, World Sailing etc. and get consistency in the use of defined terms etc. But as to the rest all that has happened is things have move around and go lost in the verbiage.

A main sail may have MAXIMUN OF 4 PARTS

Have you ever actually READ F4.4 - ?

The rectangular boom is actually not Class Compliant.

Perhaps IRSA should set a target of deleting 200 words from the Class Rules in place of adding words

Personally I do not give a fig about how the World or European Championship is scored - this only is of concern to at most 10 people in this country.

How the UK scores its National event should be determined by IOM UK or MYA - not that I can tell them apart at this time.



Dave 4111

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we are again. Rules are very simple things and all that matters is what they say. Once lay people start trying to read into the wording what the meaning or the intention says, you depart from logic and make life difficult. The rules are riddled with examples of attempts to control developement or compliance of things that are impossible to achieve and any rule that you cannot measure or check is a waste of time and paper. As to the shaping of sails question, one panel sails were always legal from day one. Shaping of sails by whatever means has never been challenged either and modern sail production is greatly helped by the use of a mould on which you assemble the individual panels. So what is the difference between a one piece moulded sail and a sail made from shaped panels?

I can be fairly confident in saying that many boats in the fleet do not comply with their class rules in one way or another, some out of ignorance and others out of the owner's determination to get an edge somehow and hope not to be challenged or caught out. That's human nature for you but as I have so often said 'Read the rules. All of the rules' and dont bother about the meaning. That's subjective thinking and the rules are black and white.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the motion to ratify the class rules, i have really done my best to fully understand the motion and have read Roberts, Rogers and all other comments but am still struggling with ALL the differant wording.

On the motion for possible use of a differant scoring system, i am finding this one quite easy to understand. HMS has evolved for many years to were we are today with it, as a whole i like it but the major problem i find is when we changed it from 3 seeding races to just 1 seeding race, for me this is just rubbish, we need to go back to 3 and get rid of the 'HOT WATER' that is your 1 seeding race.

I have read the Croatian system of the scheduled racing for the first half of the race then splitting into the fleets with no promotion or relegation, i must admit, this system does appeal to me but only for races that are 3 or more days long. For a 3 day race the idea of 2 days of scheduled racing followed by the final day of fleet racing does appeal to me, for a 5 day event, again i like the idea of just the last day of fleet racing, any more and you risk half the competitors going sight seeing or home early.

I guess the problem is that although i like the Croation system, the motion is not for this system but is for the use of ANY alternative system that the organising committee feel free to use. I would not like the idea of spending a fortune on going to a major championship that uses an unproven system of scoring, i guess if the system is used at National level in a country that had an entry of around 50 boats this would prove the system before using it at a Worlds or Euros.

I have to go sailing at Birkenhead tomorrow and try to get the average club sailor interested in casting there vote on these two motions and answer the questions they will ask, if we can all try and do this with IOM club sailors at our clubs we may get a better response and understanding even though it will not make a great differance to most club sailors it may get them thinking.

Graham

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Admin

It seems to me that the biggest problem with motion 1 is that it is trying to do to much all in one motion as it consists of things that are just tidying up due to changes in the sport (change of organisations names etc) and also changes that actual effect the way rules could/can be read.

Would have been far easier to discuss if it had been broken down into more sensible chunks as the arguments for and against seem to be only discussing the points which support their side not even mentioning the the parts of changes opposition is for/against.

At a minimum the must be dones (name changes etc) should have been a separate motion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...