UKCRA asked if MNA’s votes and hence influence, were weighted according to size of membership. RYA replied that this was generally the case since smaller MNAs may share seats when at times RYA may have two seats out of the 40 total.
I believe it is one vote per seat. If RYA has one seat, they have one vote. Their influence serves to obtain a second seat (or not).
Quote
RYA replied that they were content that the ISAF conference would result in sufficient dialogue to ensure the correct classes were chosen.
This confirms that they just want to "trade" their "acceptance" of a multihull class with the French and other multihull supporting countries.
Quote
UKCRA asked if it was still possible for RYA to change Submissions prior to 1 Nov 07. RYA confirmed that it was possible to withdraw or amend, provided the amendments were not substantial owing to the need for one person to represent several countries. RYA refused to do so, stating that they would be guided by views from other representatives expressed at the ISAF conference.
Idem, ibidem.
Quote
RYA requested ‘knowledge’ and ‘information’ to assist in the creation of its own ‘scorecard’. UKCRA pointed out that this was an admission of lack of knowledge of multihulls prior to the Submissions and that they were therefore ultimately flawed and that they should be withdrawn with immediate effect.
Good point. But although you are formally correct, this situation means that the meeting failed. The problem is that you proved them wrong and they are certainly not happy with it, so the chances of a correction are even smaller now. Also, if they want, they now have time to prepare excuses like bogus scorecards that "were used by the commitee but they had forgot about" or whatever.
This is now an open confrontation and maybe you should send the information about the commitee's lack of information and rationality to the press. But it is a very dangerous move, so you should discuss a lot the situation and the alternatives before acting.
