Roger on the blunt object.

Devon and Pete, the "bummer" is that the equipment side of the issue drives us apart, and the proposal of a mixed event has pushed the equipment to the forefront. I understand it and I anticipated it, but was surprised at its vehemence.

In addition to Submission 097-10 that Rex posted above, the inclusion of a mixed multihull event in the second round of voting was discussed with IOC prior to the August deadline, and was part of a meeting agenda back in September - Bob Merrick posted a link to a good Sail World article back at the beginning of this thread. That meeting is well above my pay grade, so I don't know what specifically was discussed, but the scuttlebutt is that the IOC and ISAF left the table with an understanding and agreement on approach and methodology. In the US Delegation meeting, I raised the concern that the mixed designation was potentially a poison pill and asked why we thought mixed would fly. I got assurances from six different directions that it was the way to go, with one of the lead reasons being that "open" is code for "men's" and "mixed" fit better the US position of increasing women's participation. The OSC, with input from cat sailors and Olympians, believes now that we can be competitive in the proposed event, which is the criterion for them to recommend to the Delegation and the Board to support it. Remember, the OSC's job is to determine events where we can medal, and develop the overall Olympic sailing program (and yes, that is the order that they do it, maddening as it is). The Delegation is tasked by ISAF to do what is best for the sport, though it surely seems that MNAs vote their medal interests over the "good of the sport" to me... or we'd not be looking for a way back into the Games.

So that is how the stage is currently set. Pete, a straw poll would be interesting, but won't sample a large enough portion of the relevant population - how many distinct sailors are represented in this thread? Ten? A dozen? I'm happy to participate in a poll, but it should be understood that the resulting data would be limited in use and might not be actionable. But still interesting.