Let me preface this post by stating that my regular class has the same "culture". We don't protest on technicalitites. I certainly don't intend to protest someone for not carrying the proper complement of USCG certified PFDs. Nor will I protest them for not carrying a paddle (which is required by our class rules), nor for a number of other rules that don't make a difference to boat performance.
Now, I'm in the market for a new PFD. My old one is - old. There may be nicer non-USCG Certified PFDs available (more comfortable, more features, whatever), but I will limit my choice to one that is certified. I have no doubt that I could get away with a non-certified PFD. Nobody in my fleet would protest me, and if ever inspected, I don't think I'd get ticketed. Nevertheless, the rules and the law require me to carry PFDs that are USCG certified, so that's what I'll do.
As a judge, it would be inappropriate for you to agree with any move to nullify one of the rules.
Actually, I've already stated that I'm sympathetic to that cause. There is no rational reason that a CE certified PFD can't be just as effective as a USCG certified PFD. I've also expressed my dislike that the wording of the rule puts us in the position of interpreting the law. Nevertheless, Coast Guard certification is the litmus test of efficacy in the US. My disagreement with the regulations does not excuse me from following them.
This is becoming a semantic argument on the meaning of terms "cheat" and "blame".
I reject the use of the loaded words of "cheat and blame".
Very well then, I will make the same argument without using perjorative terms other than your own. It will take a little longer.
My observation is that the class members ignore this prescription.... therefore, I choose to fall in line with the class philosophy.
If I may break this statement down logically, I see this as your argument (please correct me if it is inaccurate):
- Many of my competitors regularly break this rule.
- Never has anybody protested them for it.
- Therefore, breaking this rule is acceptable and correct ethical behavior.
In other words "everybody else does it so it's ok".
I have identified an individual who was uninformed about the class culture with respect to this prescription. He was essentially ignorant of this unwritten rule. I don't blame that individual. I chose to not follow the rule and follow the class culture.
I would assign BLAME to someone who was NOT ignorant of the class unwritten rule and used the Class 4 rule as a weapon to get a win in the jury room in defiance of years of class history. I can't say he would be cheating, he is exercising the letter of the rule ... I would blame him for his unsportsmanlike behavior in getting a win this way.
Continuing from the list above, I read this argument as:
- I know I am breaking a rule.
- It is legitmate for someone to enforce the rule.
- Nevertheless, if one chooses to do so, It is not my behavior that needs to change, but his.
To justify your choice to knowingly break a rule and the law, you call others "ignorant", "unsportsmanlike", and "fools".
The word blame to me means that I assign some misplaced moral judgment on the individual and defer some of my responsibility to the individual filing this protest.
Precisely.
I am clear that I accept responsibility and am not shifting any of that to the protesting individual.
In that case, I applaud your sportsmanship. I have difficulty, however, reconciling this statement with your previous ones.
My statement about changing the class or change classes is simply a practical course of action when the culture is in doubt.
I would not choose to return to a club that chooses to have their PRO go out of the way to challenge the class culture on this rule.
I have an alternate suggestion. Instead of leaving classes and regattas where the rules are enforced, why not just follow the rules?
Sincerely,
Eric
