Announcements
New Discussions
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: scooby_simon] #119065
10/07/07 04:35 PM
10/07/07 04:35 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 221
Netherlands
Hans_Ned_111 Offline
enthusiast
Hans_Ned_111  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 221
Netherlands
Dear F16 sailors,

In order of this discussion going on there is some clarification needed i think.

Quote:
The Technical committee should be keeping themselves aware of what is going on outside of the class and outside of the class rules. Only then can proper evaluations and advice be formulated when asked to do so. With blinders on such a committee can only rehash in class dogma's and that is not valuable.

The TC is just an advising committee to the GC because they are all sailors, measurers, builders and they know what is going on in the sailing world and know what the latest things are going on. If people have the idea that new experiments mentioned on this forum are disapproved then they are wrong, it is good to know about the experiments and take to you as information, if the rules are clear on the subject why should there be a TC to investigate the whole issue again if the outcome is already known. But the information can be put in the archive of people who wants to store this info.

As maybe a few people know a lot of us are working full time and also have a family with kids and wife on there side, so it will take some time to modify or add things in the little spare free time there is, we do not have all the possibility to work behind the pc for 16 hours a day and response on everything right away, we ask there fore some patient from people.

The point about the Catsailor forum is that not only F16 sailors are responding on posts which are put on that forum, and the bad thing for the class is that these people are stirring up the pot with not any advance for the class itself but only some loud discussions with people who are embarrassing others with only one result, that people interested in the F16 class, are turning there back to the class. This has already happened in the way up to the first Global Challenge at Zandvoort., there where people not coming to this event because of this bad way of discussions.
I think this will harm the class a lot when people are saying “F16 is that class who shout to each other at the Catsailor forum” and when that is happening nobody is getting the feeling of “be inclusive”.

If somebody thinks that the Catsailor forum is banned then there is a misunderstanding, everybody can put on that forum what he wants of course. And if somebody sees the failing from the GC to support on active communication then there is probably a wrong point of view. For example, the ballot done earlier this year. After a short note about this there was a lot of comment to do this via the internet tool because the class was set up on the internet. In response on that the GC did a huge amount of work to achieve this, only the response from the members was very disappointed, even a bit frustrating. The whole agm meeting points will be published on the internet so everybody can read what was discussed. Indeed the Agenda was not ready on time and published on time, this is a point on improvement next year. This was the first time ever that a set up like this was used in the F16 and of course there is enough space for improvement in the coming years.
There is also a worry about the fact that the GC should act like a dictator committee, but the only thing what they are doing is trying to put all the loose ends in more structured way and keep a very close eye to the rules on doing that. We try also to listen to F16 sailors as much as possible and even to non F16 sailors because they can have good ideas which will fit in the spirit of the class.
I think the post “self-inflicted”made is exact the thing where we all should be worried about, it has already happened, this is a missed change.

At the moment we have a GC with all dedicated people on board who are only looking in the favor of the F16 class and working hard to make the F16 class a success in the future.

Best regards,
Hans Klok
Chairman Governing Council.

--Advertisement--
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Hans_Ned_111] #119066
10/07/07 06:10 PM
10/07/07 06:10 PM
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 915
Dublin, Ireland
Dermot Offline
old hand
Dermot  Offline
old hand

Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 915
Dublin, Ireland
I have been registered on catsailor.com for 6 years since October 01. The 2 forums I regularly check are the Open Forum and the F16 Forum. I was involved with Wouter’s "David & Goliath F16 Series" in the very early days.

I have to disagree with Mark's statement:
"I'm also sorry Wouter, but like the tail wagging the dog this public forum can never dictate to the F16 Governing Council. Yes it is a very good tool for the F16 Class when used correctly but don't kid yourself too much I wouldn't have thought that many people have bought an F16 on the back of it.".

I believe that the growth and credibility of the F16 Class is almost entirely due to this forum. Maybe every so often things get hot and people say more that they should (and Wouter gets over protective and has to let go), but this forum is the heart of the F16 class. I am very happy to race a Spitfire, which was once welcomed and "Grandfathered", but is now a rival. It does not stop me from believing that the F16 concept is going to succeed.
The relatively small numbers of F16 sailors may be out there doing it, but if the rest of us were not seen to accept that the class was viable, by our constant reference to F16 when we mention existing cat classes, then I do not believe that numbers would be growing as they have. I really believe that this forum (with Wouter and the original group) is what made it all happen.
Continue the good work, back off on the public arguing and the class will grow.


Dermot
Catapult 265
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Dermot] #119067
10/08/07 12:11 PM
10/08/07 12:11 PM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
Rolf_Nilsen Offline

Carpal Tunnel
Rolf_Nilsen  Offline

Carpal Tunnel

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
In view of the current discussion, I have some opinions I want to express.


I agree fully with what Dermot wrote. The F-16 class would be nowhere without this forum. The forum is not the only thing of importance of course, but what got this class going was the forum. In my own case, I have been acting as an ambassador for the class here in Norway for the last years, making sure F-16s and the F-16 concept was mentioned as often as possible. I would not have become interested in the class unless the forum existed and was run the way it was. I am certain I am not the only ambassador recruited this way. Changing the succesful way the class have been managed, which encourages involvement, is very risky in my opinion. The gains from creating a forum closed to outsiders are minor compared to the advantages of an open forum as far as I can see. Unless somebody have hard numbers on how many are recruited vs. how many are turned off or are indifferent, we are playing with the continued success of the class. Are anybody going to say that the class have not been a success so far? If not, why change a winning recipe?

I wish the GC communicated what they were working on and what direction they are going more often. I have all respect for the need to earn money and put food on the table. I also wish the best for the class, and all I am saying is what I think is the best for the class. Pretty much we are all working for the same goal, but we see different ways to reach it. If confrontations like we have seen over the last two weeks are to be avoided, communication is needed! Implementing a new strategy of which just a select group is informed is not a good way to bring about change. Trench warfare is usually the result. I, as an F-16 homebuilder and ambassador, want to be involved with, and informed about what is going on in the class. I firmly belive the best way to do so is with open communication on this forum except under very rare circumstances. The F-16 class is not a business with business secrets, but a gathering of like minded sailors.
The AGM was discussed earlier in a thread: http://www.catsailor.com/forums/sho...96&an=0&page=3#Post99496 and nothing much have changed since then. I think the class itself should be allowed to decide on what direction to go and how it should be run. That is what ballots are for, and running a ballot is not time consuming or difficult once the infrastructure is there.


A last and more personal note. I was so outraged by the behaviour of members in the "F-16 wings" thread that I would have deleted my profile and left the forum and possibly the class for good if technically possible. Some might feel it's a pity I did not leave, but I think the kind of behaviour seen lately to be far more damaging to the way our class
is percieved than any open discussion.
We recently put our Tornado on the market and we are now three sailors building our own F-16 Blades in strip plank. Interest for F-16s is quite large up here now, but the used boat market is too small for growth. When the prices begin to drop, we will have a class up here. I would not have engaged in the class if it was run another way, and the class would be as unknown here as it is in France. Transforming the F-16 class into a blueprint of e.g. the F-18 class will make the class far less interesting to me, and I might just as well have stayed on the T.

Importance of the F16 open forum [Re: Dermot] #119068
10/08/07 01:18 PM
10/08/07 01:18 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Wouter Offline OP
Carpal Tunnel
Wouter  Offline OP
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Just two weeks ago a Spanish couple visited me at the Zandvoort sailing club to get a test ride on an F16. They became aware of the F16 class through the internet and after following the discussions on the F16 forum for a while they decided that the F16 was the best boat for them. And we had many go through this route.

I can give names of many F16 sailors and sailors still looking to become F16 sailors who were and are attracted to the F16 class by sole virtue of its internet presence and specifically because of this forum.

We would never have sold boats to sailors in locales like Arizona, New Mexico, Dubai, Shanghai, Finland, Sweden, Singapore and a score of other places not being UK, NL or Florida if we hadn't had this forum.

There is a reason why FX-one and I-17 are doing badly despite having much nicer full colour brochures, well establish dealor networks, vastly superior brand familiarity (who has never heard of Hobie or Nacra ?) and significantly superior sailors like Booth, Curry and Vink showcasing these boats.

I don't just think the forum is the most important tool in attracting new sailors, I actually know it for a fact because I'm still answering several mails a week where people tell me that. And the only place where you can get my personal e-mail adress is of my catsailor.com forum profile.

Wouter

Last edited by Wouter; 10/08/07 01:20 PM.

Wouter Hijink
Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild)
The Netherlands
Re: Importance of the F16 open forum [Re: Wouter] #119069
10/09/07 02:26 AM
10/09/07 02:26 AM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 221
Netherlands
Hans_Ned_111 Offline
enthusiast
Hans_Ned_111  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 221
Netherlands
Dear F16 sailors,

In follow up of the whole discussion, it is a shame that Rolf is even thinking about leaving the class because of the behavior and way of writing on this forum by people.
That is the problem, if somebody writes something on the forum and logic not everybody is agreeing with that because that’s not possible. When you have 100 people you will have 100 different points of views. The fact that the reaction often cannot be normal and is mostly or aggressive or very defensively can make it very unattractive to interested people who are reading the forum because they are interested in the class.

I think that the majority of people who is reacting on the forum should scratch the back of his head twice and think what he will write instead of giving an emotional, sometimes irrelevant, reply.
If we all (forum users) make an agreement with each other that we have to operate in the profit of the F16 class and first think about the F16 class and then about them selves and write this down in an behavior way then you will get a normal discussion where everybody can put his opinion on the forum without embarrassing others.

In follow up on what the GC is doing about communication. When there is an issue what should be known by the members then they communicate this with the members and they don’t do any secret thing what nobody may now.

I read a lot of the forum stuff (sometimes to much) and it crossed my mind a couple of times already why can’t this type of discussions not be done in a normal way.
So my call to everybody who wants the best for the F16 class please act like that.

Best regards,

Hans Klok
Chairman F16 Governing Council.

Btw The Spanish people did buy a Nacra 5.0 and not a F16 yet.

Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Rolf_Nilsen] #119070
10/09/07 07:15 AM
10/09/07 07:15 AM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
F
fin. Offline
Carpal Tunnel
fin.  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
F

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
ROLF!! Relax buddy! TC, GC. How many divisions do they have? They are ultimately answerable to the membership, not the other way around. We who enjoy this forum will continue to do so. No one can make you participate in a private forum.

Just keep doing what you're doing. Spring is coming soon, I'd really like to see all three of those boats in the water! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

And, btw, Wouter single-handedly converted me from A cat to F16. . . on this forum!

Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Dermot] #119071
10/09/07 07:19 AM
10/09/07 07:19 AM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Quote

I have to disagree with Mark's statement:
"... Yes it is a very good tool for the F16 Class when used correctly but don't kid yourself too much I wouldn't have thought that many people have bought an F16 on the back of it.".


Strongly agree with your disagreement!!

Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: ] #119072
10/09/07 07:22 AM
10/09/07 07:22 AM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
F
fin. Offline
Carpal Tunnel
fin.  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
F

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
Let's have a vote:

Who was strongly influenced by this forum to buy (or build) an F16?

Aye.

Last edited by Tikipete; 10/09/07 07:23 AM.
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: fin.] #119073
10/09/07 07:38 AM
10/09/07 07:38 AM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,049
Sebring, Florida.
Timbo Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Timbo  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,049
Sebring, Florida.
Me as well. If not for this forum and Wouter's F-16 concept insistance, and Matt McDonald's efforts (and I'm sure he found Phill Brander through this forum and/or through Wouter and this forum) I would never have considered these boats.

In fact, when I first crossed over to cats from Mono's, 10 years ago, it was largely because of the information I learned on this forum, and all the great people I met through the Catsailor forums.

With the internet, it is truley a small world. Now, since we all are like minded, can we stop throwing crap at each other, see all the possitives that come out of this and let the negatives go? Thanks.


Blade F16
#777
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: fin.] #119074
10/09/07 08:12 AM
10/09/07 08:12 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Wouter Offline OP
Carpal Tunnel
Wouter  Offline OP
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Quote

TC, GC. How many divisions do they have?



That is just the issue. We don't know officially because nothing is being communicated through the forum or the webpage.

I feel this is the core of the problem. The F16 class as a whole may well agree with everything the GC does (even when I don't) but the GC needs to argue their case to us all here on the forum/webpage and allow the membership to exercize its rights of oversight. Currently that is not done (whatever the reason for that are)

More importantly the GC would be wise to seek and acquire majority support for their idea's and projects before initiating and implementing them. That saves us all alot of emotional arguing when members find out "after the deal is done" that they are not in agreement. That is the F16 tradition.

Also I can't agree more with what Rolf has written down so effectively. I too have been more vocal in private about leaving the class altogether. I finding that I'm unwilling to cover for the GC in private mails and discussions anymore. I too have grown dessillusioned with the preceived drive towards an old-school class structure much like the F18's and A's as well as lack of GC responsiveness. I'm sorry but that is just the way things are at my place. Piss off a few more ambassadors like that and the F16 class is in for a real adventure.

Wouter

Last edited by Wouter; 10/09/07 08:39 AM.

Wouter Hijink
Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild)
The Netherlands
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Wouter] #119075
10/09/07 08:20 AM
10/09/07 08:20 AM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
F
fin. Offline
Carpal Tunnel
fin.  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
F

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
"the GC needs to argue their case" No Wout, only you and I NEED to argue.

"the GC would be wise to seek and acquire majority support ". I agree, mostly. But, I am simply not interested in hearing every detail and I get lost very easily in the technical jargon.

Let them do their work, at some point it all has to come before the general membership.

Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: fin.] #119076
10/09/07 08:24 AM
10/09/07 08:24 AM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,049
Sebring, Florida.
Timbo Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Timbo  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,049
Sebring, Florida.
Discussion is good. Argueing is bad. Let's discuss issues, not argue them.


Blade F16
#777
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Timbo] #119077
10/09/07 08:30 AM
10/09/07 08:30 AM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
F
fin. Offline
Carpal Tunnel
fin.  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
F

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
Here ya go.

I can comfortably afford to maintain my Blade at it's current technological developement. I doubt if that would be the case if we went to "full" developement philosophy i.e. wings and foils.

I suspect the A cats are about to reach the upper cost limit that their members are willing to accept. We would do well to monitor them.

I know a lot of you guys like wings and foils, but I don't think I can afford them.

Last edited by Tikipete; 10/09/07 08:32 AM.
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: fin.] #119078
10/09/07 08:40 AM
10/09/07 08:40 AM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
Rolf_Nilsen Offline

Carpal Tunnel
Rolf_Nilsen  Offline

Carpal Tunnel

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
Pete,

forget wings and foils. This is not about technical changes to the boats or stuff. Very few of us want radical changes, or can afford them.

Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: fin.] #119079
10/09/07 08:41 AM
10/09/07 08:41 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Wouter Offline OP
Carpal Tunnel
Wouter  Offline OP
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe


The discussion has nothing to do with : "wings and foils" anymore. The responses to those topics was merely the drop that spilled the bucket on a larger issue.

Wouter


Wouter Hijink
Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild)
The Netherlands
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Wouter] #119080
10/09/07 08:51 AM
10/09/07 08:51 AM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
F
fin. Offline
Carpal Tunnel
fin.  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
F

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
Okay. I still say "relax". Much has been said. Let's define the problem.

Wout? Rolf?

Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Wouter] #119081
10/09/07 08:53 AM
10/09/07 08:53 AM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 221
Netherlands
Hans_Ned_111 Offline
enthusiast
Hans_Ned_111  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 221
Netherlands
"Quote"
I feel this is the core of the problem. The F16 class as a whole may well agree with everything the GC does (even when I don't) but the GC needs to argue their case to us all here on the forum/webpage and allow the membership to exercize its rights of oversight. Currently that is not done (whatever the reason for that are)

Give us an example on what you think we have done and not discussed with the members. Probably you know more then the GC.

"Quote"
More importantly the GC would be wise to seek and acquire majority support for their idea's and projects before initiating and implementing them. That saves us all alot of emotional arguing when members find out "after the deal is done" that they are not in agreement. That is the F16 tradition.

I am interested what "deal" you are reffering to. I have no idea what you mean.


Best regards,

Hans Klok

Web : http://www.catamaranparts.nl
Blog : http://catamaranparts.blogspot.nl
Mail : info@catamaranparts.nl

Raptor F16 and A-class builder
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Rolf_Nilsen] #119082
10/09/07 09:20 AM
10/09/07 09:20 AM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,049
Sebring, Florida.
Timbo Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Timbo  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,049
Sebring, Florida.
I don't want to see wings or foils in the F16 class either. But I would be interested to watch some other class develop them, see if maybe some day years from now, they could be fitted to other boats for improved handling and performance. I can understand the A class not wanting to see them either, those boats are already very expensive, who needs the added cost of new toys? So maybe (as I alluded to in one post) there could be a new class called, Mini C class, a one man, foiling, wing-sail, open development yet box rule (with a fixed hull length, width, wing area) class.

It took someone some kind of development to get from a Hobie 16 to the F-16's we have today, so I am not against development, but I also can't afford to do it myself. If Ben Hall wants to lead the way, more power to him. When he gets it all sorted out, and prices are affordable, maybe then we can add wings or foils or what ever. Just not today...


Blade F16
#777
Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Wouter] #119083
10/09/07 09:35 AM
10/09/07 09:35 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
Matt M Offline
addict
Matt M  Offline
addict

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
[quote

That is just the issue. We don't know officially because nothing is being communicated through the forum or the webpage.[/quote]

Wouter, Please quick acting like the spolied brat who feels like they are being left out of the game.

There is nothing being communicated because there is nothing being changed. It is not a conspiracy, the class rules and organization as developed with input from everyone are staying unchanged.

The GC meeting was held at your club and yet you for some reason ellected not to attend. Now you have the audacity to represent some conspiracy theory?. I have better things to do than become one of the fourm hacks but I feel this needs addressed.

At the GC:

1)We approved the the votes on the items that were discussed and voted for on line.
2)We elected a new Tresurer as Hans Geissler has dissapeared
3) We intitiated the format to have a technical committe to review any possible future changes to the class rules that might affect the design or use of the boats. Their only funtion being to review and reccomend courses of action.


All proposals for changes to the rules are still going to be posted on the forum for input and discussion. Changes are still voted on for approval as before. Nothing is currently on the slate for change.

As someone with a lot invested emotionaly and monetarily I really take offense at the insinuation of a conspiracy. Nothing has changed in the class other than you are no longer the chairman. You have taken upon your self to make this even more severe in not attending the 1 meeting we have had as a class.

If you have a proposal, please make it as one. If you have an issue with a memeber, please address that with that particular person.

Matt McDonald

Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO [Re: Matt M] #119084
10/09/07 09:41 AM
10/09/07 09:41 AM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348
F
fin. Offline
Carpal Tunnel
fin.  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
F

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348

Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  Damon Linkous, phill, Rolf_Nilsen 

Search

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 426 guests, and 69 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Darryl, zorro, CraigJ, PaulEddo2, AUS180
8150 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics22,404
Posts267,055
Members8,150
Most Online2,167
Dec 19th, 2022
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1