Something for the F16 technical committee

Something for the F16 technical committee :

Over at Sailing anarchy they are discussing the conclusions concerning full foiling.

Steve Clark (Cogito C-class) wrote :

Steve Clark




So making full foiling work is not as easy that a throrougly dedicated C-class team (who also made the victorious Alpha !) could get it to perform better then a plain old displacement hull.

This is an indication of what to expect to F16's. I know full foiling has been banned in our rules already but the fear may have been premature.

I think we should note this down for future reference.

Additional info is found in this discussion on sailing anarchy :

http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums/ind...9168&st=300

And here some addition info on a unrelated project coming to the same conclusions :

http://homepages.rya-online.net/ejcchapman/

Wouter

Wouter

Sorry wouter, do not agree.

They only got the foils sussed before the regatta, they have only been sailing the boat on foils a short while.

I was very surprised they were as close as they were to the other boats for an untried platform etc.

Comments on SA (don't have time to find them) said (paraphrase) that they "showed bursts of speed"

I'd suggest that with time (and money) it would be quicker on foils.

In the same Sailing anarchy discussion it was said by one the foiling "Rocker" team members that their foiling project was not a last minute attempt, but rather a well planned and thoroughly executed sister project. They really intended to make this craft their flagship.

I think their own comments are telling, They don't feel that there is enough potential in the full foiling concept to continue developping it for the C-class cats.

Wouter

I have to disagree with you Wouter (and I suspect others do too <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> )!

There is nothing here for the Tech Committee at all. It doesn't affect F16 one iota. The F16 class rules are perfectly clear and a foiling F16 just couldn't qualify within the rules. So, nothing to see, pass along please! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

What a bunch of easily frightened little sailors we have become lately.

I just wanted to input these C-class experiences into the class technical data archieve (and F16 sailor conciousness) so we can possibly retrieve it at a later time when possible required to evaluate a new development or F16 proposal.

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. I venture to claim that similar things apply to the class members as well.

I get the impression that even the mere investigating of new developments and experiences on this forum is strongly disapproved lately. All under the mantra of not scaring any (new) class members.

I fear that I will strongly dissapprove of such a policy if indeed that is the new policy.

And what is up with ;"So, nothing to see, pass along please!"

What a great way to start a new rumour <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Wouter

NO; it is a way to STOP one.

F16 is not going foiling as the class rules do not allow it.

Is there actually a class technical committee? On the website I can only find mention of the Chairman, Secretary and Treasurer.

Yes there is. I'm pretty sure it consists of Peit Sarsberg (spelling ?) John Pierce, Greg Goodall, Phil Brander and I believe they would also like to co-opt Andrew landenberger. If these details are in correct I do apologies.

Wouter,

If you had gone to the AGM at the Global challenge (I am sure you can come up with some sort of excuse - but the fact is the meeting was held literally in your back yard & I know of several people who could not get there), you would been party to discussion that tabled how technical issue would be dealt with & who somebody with a tecnical query (builder, owner or whoever) should approach.

Now it may be that the F16 website needs some updating, but this forum is not the place for this type of discussion.

Marcus

Where are the minutes from that meeting? It's great that you all decided "who somebody with a technical query (builder, owner or whoever) should approach", but if the information isn't published then you can't blame anyone who doesn't follow whatever process was decided.

Yes it is! Personally, I'll say anything I like, anytime I like, and any where I like. If you don't like it, don't join in!

John,
I agree. Lets move on we have a lot of work to do.
Rehards,
Phill

I know where you're coming from Pete but sometimes "There's a time and a place" In the future there will probably be a F16 users forum on our Official website, so rather making every criticism or other derogatory remark open to the public you can do it behind closed doors so to speak.
I'm sure you would agree that this is better for the F16 Class rather than airing our dirty washing for all current and prospective Cat sailors to view.

True.

It would be nice if this information reaches class members sooner, than later.

Looking forward to a privatley owned and run forum. I consider myself an expert in VB software, so if you all want a volunteer to install/run/setup a vB forum let me know. I willing to do it.

I have setup two, that are still running strong and I currently administrate one with over 5K members.

Count me in for that project.

point out you were instrumental in tightening up the rules to exclude many areas..
Including the foiling ban... Ban on non-removable beams etc..

Then I'm a box rule guy..

I never banned the discussions.

Wouter

I don't think it's good to have two forums for the F16 class. One for blah-blah and one for the real concerning topics only for F16 members. It was always said that this forum here is a part of the success of the class, so it would be better to think twice before posting dirty washings, than to separate the forum for this reason.
Nothing against an objective argument here, and when the discussion makes a digression we have the class officials to point us in the right direction.

Ever consider that open discussion attracts people rather than repels them? The more that the F-16 Class is included in various topics of discussion, the more attention it will receive...remember "out of site...out of mind".

A person of integrity who speaks the truth in the open should not be feared.

Regards,
Bob

I really do agree with Holger. I don't think we can understate the positive impact of the forum on the success of the class and I think anything that diverts part of the community dialog to a different environment would have unintended negative consequences.

And honestly I think it is unnecessary. I do understand the nervousness people have about the effect some lines of discussion may have on perceptions outside the class. But really, I think these tensions arise either because people aren't clear on the basic principles of the class (Rules 2.3 and 2.6) or because they think others don't understand or respect those principles.

It's not impossible for the class rules to change if there are compelling reasons (though the restricted development character of the class should make that a pretty rare event imo). And we can have good vigorous discussions about them when the need arises. But if 2.3/2.6 were to ever change (and kudos to Wouter for putting them there - if anyone understands them he does), imo, we could all pack up and go home. But I think as long as the people involved in these debates clearly understand them to be framed and constrained by the class's basic founding principles, and are careful not to mistakenly give a different impression, we should be fine.

Hi Holger
I think I should just clarify that the suggestion of a F16 members Forum was just that 'a suggestion' but this point does raise the issue of integrity. Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned this fact at all as it was just a chat with a member of the Governing Council. I'm not to know if this was a personal or political idea?
However, I do understand the views of people who think we have nothing to hide and this Forum can be used for any business we see fit to post. I personally have certainly ruffled a few feathers in the past!! which to some people wasn't in the best interest of the Class and there are a couple of others who also aren't backward in coming forward as well.
But in saying all this I would agree with a F16 members forum. I'm positive it wouldn't take anything away from this forum but would enable me to discuss good and bad issues which affect the F16 Class and those persons directly involved. Only then can true integrity (1 honesty. 2 the quality of being whole or united) be adopted otherwise we will carry on with a form of censorship which I feel exists on this particular forum.

Im sorry, but I agree with Holger and Mark here. One of the worst promotional things to do as a class is to give the appearence that you have something to hide. Having a private forum for the "honest" stuff is one of the best ways to feed such perceptions.

It also goes directly against the "be inclusive" principle that was at the basis of the F16 class from its creation. On what other grounds would we have put up with members like you and Stewart, Mark ? Or even myself ! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

But seriously, I fear some are underestimating how different the F16 class is from your run of the mill sailing classes. I know some feel that this forum is a promotional liability, but then I know that without it we would never had a F16 class to begin with.

Yes, I agree with these same people that "openness and inclusiveness" can become liabilities when out of control but I also believe that "tight control" can be a serious liability in its own right. If F16 sailors wanted tight control then they would be sailing in Hobie classes. And they would be right in doing so as Hobie does that best, although the number of Hobie classes is very quickly decreasing for some reason. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Wouter

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. If you think having a Forum specifically for people with a proper connection to the F16 Class is a 'tight control' I would beg to differ. This suggested Forum, being recogniesd by the various association members and GC would to my mind do the exact opposite. So if you're concerned that some hobie 14 sailor from a place which I never knew existed felt left out then so be it. They should buy a proper Cat <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

AGM or no AGM, if the policy isn't publicized in writing with a follow-up web based discussion (private or open) then it is not a generally agreed F16 policy. The F16 class was not founded that way. I also believe that discussions can not be ended by refering to the AGM. Most class members can not be present there in person and as such an AGM merely acts as a tool to not have a broad discussion inside the class. As the topics (agenda) were not not publized before the AGM there was no way to prepare oneself for them or send in contributions.

The AGM is one of those archaic institutions that the F16 class during the start-up phase kept out of the class. There is a reason why no AGM or alike setup is mentioned in the F16 class rules and why this forum and the webpage are (were?). I find an AGM were everybody needs to be physically present an outdated concept in this internet age and I think one may succesfully hold the argument that it may be democratically quesionable. Otherwise one can easily maintain the argument that the holding of an AGM is not in line with the F16 class rules,

I refer to rule 2.2.1 :

[color:"green"]
The Formula 16 Class Authority will be formed by the Formula 16 General Council and appointed local representatives and related officials. Any official communication will be handled via the official Formula 16 webpage and e-mail address which at this time are ... ...
[/color]


Therefor the AGM can not be considered "any official communication" because it has no generally accessible webpage based linkage like video conferencing. The F16 forum is of course part of the F16 web presence (c.q. webpage) and is at this time the only place to hold official discussions as defined by the F16 class rules.

Additionally, discussions are much improved if people have the time to research the situation and formulate a reply calmly, not to mention cool off. None of this is garanteed at a physical AGM. More then onces it will degrade into an emotional scream fest, were soft spoken contributors will not be heard at all. A web based textual environment is much superior.

I'm aware of the arguments in favour of having an AGM but sadly these are among the points on which I disagree with the current GC. I thought that I was the only one but found out differently.

I'm also saddened to report that I found a few F16 officials to be lacking in their understanding of the F16 class rules. (Two examples are given in this post). But this is no small wonder as the people involved in crafting and refining the class rules over the first 5 years were not involved in any way. Only very recently did Phill Brander become part of the GC and only as its secretary, not as an advisor/consultant on the class rules. As the creator of the F16 class rules I have had the pleasure to argue the intepretation of the F16 class rules with an official who neither sails or owns an F16, is not seriously interested in F16's and who is far more heavily involved in a rival catamaran class. I have nothing but respect for this person, but I do question whether he is the right person for the job.



With respect to the latter part of your statement.

If the website is not updated and this forum is no longer the place for discussions then were do F16 class members find the official F16 communique's and hold their discussions ?

Are we abandoning two operational institutions without providing alternatives ? What is the point in that ? Assuming for the moment that it is indeed considered wise to abandon these two F16 pilars at all.

How does this new (no ?) "communication policy", satisfy the F16 class rules ?


I specifically refer to rule 2.7.1 :

[color:"green"]
Any Formula 16 class member may propose amendments, additions or changes to the rule. They will be supported in their efforts by the Formula 16 authority with respect to communication and be given the means to propose the amendments, changes or additions to the class as a whole.
[/color]

I'm failing to see this required active support by the GC.


Now with respect to "openness" of the F16 class, the 3rd pilar the F16 class was founded on. I'm sure the GC is working hard on getting the minutes of the Zandvoort AGM finished and publized. Praise there. I hope to see the minutes on the other meetings held on the future of the class as well.


With respect to Mark's comments :




I actually beg to differ here. It is rather that the F16 sailors are the F16 class and the GC is empowered to execute the wishes of the class. It is not so that the GC is the dog that commands its slavish tail to wag when it wants to and how it wants to. We are not here for the greater glory of the GC. The GC is here for the greater glory of the F16 class and that means us, the sailors !


Wouter

It does - I've received some stuff from John in the last few days, and I'll get it up in the next few.

Paul

You really don't get it do you Wouter!!! I was trying to refrain from mentioning your not so subtle absence from the AGM, but had you the inclination to ask for an agenda in advance then I'm positive that you would have been furnished with one well prior of the Meeting. The meeting itself IMO was very proactive and even you must surely admit holding an AGM prior to the 2007 Global Challenge would have been a bit impractical if not impossible whilst you were Chairperson. As for the rest of your comments I personally don't really think having an AGM or perhaps a specific Forum for Class members will make any negative differences what so ever to the Class, now or in the future.

Before we start any distracting rumours, let me inform everybody on what went down with respect to my person and the AGM.

On the day the AGM was going to be held I contacted the Chairman and ran through the expected procedings. This talk was short and I was assured that nothing major would come to pass. He agreed that I wouldn't miss anything by not attending. The next day I approached Martien and had a long talk covering the topics and what everybody said.

The reason I didn't attend the AGM personally has to do with the fact that we are not all born with perfect bodies. There are times when I need to involuntarily excuse myself. I have done this more often during the week. After the dinner at the Indian restaurant, on the day with the trip to Amsterdam, etc.

But I admit that this is the most easily found stick to hit me with.

Wouter

Nice move Wouter re-editing your post after my reply!! Openness and Integrity in it's truest form?

Actually I had only read your posting after I had finished my earlier posting.

Do you have anymore scandalous angles you may want to try to take attention away from the real issues ?

Wouter

My only angle is that you changed your 10:17 post quite dramatically after my response at 10:52. This re-edit was posted at 11:29. The only scandal is that my response is now based on information which you subsequently changed.

I'm enjoying this banter between you two BUT If you pair want to see who has the biggest manhood YOU should really be doing it privatly than on a public forum where everybody can and will read it
SO both agree to disagree and move ON
Because it's stuff like this ,that people move people away from the class not towards it
Regards Richard

Touche

Richard,



The sad thing is........you couldn't be more right.

Regards,
Phill

Agree with you Phill. Pushed me out and effected my decision when buying a boat a year ago.

FFS Wouter,

If you have something to say to me then take it off this forum. I really can't be arsed to trade semantics with you in public.

James,
While I understand your position, it was a shame to lose you
When in Australia you put a lot of effort into demonstrating the F16 concept to others.
I hope you are enjoying the A class and the best of luck in the US.

Regards,
Phill

No I did not Mark !

I finished my posting at the time specified by the update. I save my longer postings several times during creation as there is a time-out limit after which you loose everything you write. During the time I took to complete what I wanted to say you entered your reply, which I only saw AFTER I had finished my own posting.

I did not (and would not) alter my posts depending on what any reply to them may or may not have said.

Neither did I change major points in my posting after the first draft.I did reposition the order of things and improved the text for easier reading but I did not change the points themselves. I may have added a point or two but that is mute as you can not have replied to something that wasn't there at the time you read it.

Sorry Mark, you are grasping at straws and you are still trying to find a scandal to take attention away from the points raised.

Wouter

I don't, and that is why I didn't contact you privately.

I have things to say to the class as a whole and that includes the GC.

I'm also drawing attention to some points of conflict. Look up the word "semantics" if you are confused about the difference in meaning.

I have to ask this though. Is your reply :"I really can't be arsed to trade semantics with you in public." the official reply by the secretary of the GC ?

If not then can we get a reasoned response to the points raised please. In public that is, as I'm hard pressed to see any use of you being "arsed" to communicate with me in private ?

It is not me who has a problem, but the class. I'm fronting for a group of people who have become dissatisfied.

Wouter

Thanks Phill. Need all the luck I can get, and need some wind to go sailing! In between monsoons at the moment for the past month and next couple, so the only wind are those from the local storm cells generally.

Still have an interest in F16 as Singapore has the biggest fleet of F16s. At last count we had 17 Taipans, 2 Blades (Vectorworks and one built by Scott), and now 2 Vipers with more on the way.

How about look up the word "Belligerent".

Wouter,

In that case; in order to avoid confusion and misleading comments, you should prepare you posts in a text editor first. Then, once you are happy with your comments, copy them and paste them into a reply. Once you post it, it's out in public.

You may or may not be aware that if people subscribe to a thread, then they get emailed what you post originally, not what is edited.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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!

Strongly agree with your disagreement!!

Let's have a vote:

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

Aye.

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.

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

"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.

Discussion is good. Argueing is bad. Let's discuss issues, not argue them.

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.

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.

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

Okay. I still say "relax". Much has been said. Let's define the problem.

Wout? Rolf?

"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.

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...

[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

http://www.dalecarnegie.com/about_us/about_us.jsp

Pete, you crack me up! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I remember the at times heated umm discussions between Wouter and myself on the rules.. I'm a box rule guy.. So we didn't see eye to eye.. but the baby works..
So I guess I'm a founding member of the "F16 forum rules" appreciation society

Pete, What about all the F16 sailors who just aren't bothered with using this Forum and only bought an F16 to sail, race and enjoy and not as an excuse to spend hours on their computer.

They're probably out sailing.

"Would anyone like something to read?"-M. Prothero

Hey Matt, whats with the language? Want to heat this up or cool it down? I have been pretty frustrated myself, but lets keep it cool.
This is not just Wouter you know, I am also concerned so pointing only at him is not fair.

It is good to hear that there were no discussion about changing the status of this forum as the main line of communication within the class by creating a closed forum. That is what both Wouter and I wanted in the clear. Thanks for putting a stop to that notion. Would have been great if it had come earlier so we would not have had to go trough this.
The technical committee was new to me, and I try to keep informed about things. Dont you think mentioning this new creation beforehand would have been proper? It is really no big thing with the mandate outlined here, but it do raise the question if there is anything else going on. No "conspiracy theories" but I hope you can agree that proper communication like we used to enjoy is much better than rumours and surprises like this and the ISAF recognized status.


Not to heat things up with a snide comment, but I honestly found it odd that the F-16 TC was formed with A-cat sailors and only Phill as a class insider. Phill is easily worth 4 A-cat sailors (and that was a joke) so I am not worried, but some more diversity would be good. I am certain we could have found many good candidates if the class had been consulted by a 5 minute post on the forum.

Who is saying anything about a conspiracy ?

I only said that the GC's lack of communication is increasingly spawning discontent.

I never said or suggested that this was intentional on the part of the GC. Something that is obviously required for it to be conspiracy at all.

I am saying however that they should do something about it. As things stand now there is confusion in the class and are getting more promises of reports soon to come.

The people not present at the AGM had to find out via the rumour cirquit that an F16 Technical committee is formed. The rumour cirquit has not confirmed yet who is on it. And I, for one, do indeed object to some members in that committee. However at this time I (or anybody else) can't do anything as there is nothing official or concrete to base a proposal or amendment on, like the minutes of the AGM.


Another point.
Is the class (or the GC) working towards official ISAF acceptance or not ?

This does matter as going for acceptance means we need to change our class rules. One of those has already been done per ballot last june, I believe. A decision to go for full ISAF recognition is a major issue that needs to be decided by the class as a whole. Not going for full ISAF recognitions is just as involved.


Third point :
How does the AGM fit in with the current class rules, that is if the class even wants to have an AGM at all ?

Currently the F16 class rules considers an AGM as on a par with a bar room talk where two or more F16 sailors are present. Basically it doesn't recognize the AGM at all. It can therefor not be an official "event" UNLESS the class rules get changed in the future. This doesn't mean the AGM can not be a valuable exchange of idea's or a preparatory meeting for a larger discussion on the forum, it just means that it isn't part of official class business.


This brings us to your second point



Nobody is objecting or is going to object to Phill graciously picking up the thankless jib of being the F16 class thesurer. However the AGM as it stands now can not official approve or disapprove anything.

For Phills tenure to become official and approved it must be communicated through the official channels and those are the website and the forum. There the whole class can take notice and possibly give their input.

If we as the F16 class decides to MAKE an AGM official class business then a change of the class rules is in order.

Right now we are in a legal limbo. At one point it is argued that the AGM is official while at the other it is claimed nothing with respect to the class rules has changed. We can't have both at the same time.


On to the other issues raised.

There had been rumours of moving the forum to another location and possibly closing it off to F16 members only. If these rumours are true, which we don't know as the GC neither confirms or denies such things, then that is a major policy shift as well. The class needs to be informed if the GC has adopted that as an official policy and be allowed to discuss and, yes indeed, approve or disapprove of it.


Others have stated that wild speculation and playing with new idea's on this forum is hurting the F16 class. If this is indeed found to be true (which is a whole discussion on its own) then simply shutting down any thread with a "shut up, nothing to see here, move on" is not the right way to handle it.

Lay the issues out on the forum and then continue to propose a policy (accepted/supported by the posters) were we avoid such discussions or put them into a format that is very clearly outside of the official F16 class.

Basically it all comes down to one thing. Communication !


Communicating what is going on or what the stance of the GC is on issues combats confusion and rumours. It also prepares the class for any changes long before they are made and facilitates acceptance of these and allows its members to provide input.

The above listing is by no means exhaustive. And indeed it is time for the minutes to be published so we can get to those other topics.

I know alot of stuff from sticking my antenna up in the air, but I need official communication like the minutes and concrete policies adopted by the GC to be able to propose changes or amendments. And again this is required as per F16 class rules.

Wouter

Dear F16 sailors,

It is easy to answer this all and i already did try it before, but if everybody just has a little bit of patient what the GC is presenting and what the ideas are and is proposing in what direction we as class can go, then makes it live a lot easier. It will talk/ask to the members and listen to the members about it but if people starts to react or put posts on the CS forum because they are having heard some rumors then it becomes a difficult situation. Of course you can easily say "i have heard this or that" and i send some mails to college sailor/friends and ask what do you know or have you heard about this, you will get an answer from that sailor/friend and you have your rumor. When you put that rumor on the CS then the ghost is out the bottle and not controllable anymore. This is happening many times on this forum and makes it for anybody who is working in any committee or GC or whatever you want to call it impossible to work with, because they are only has to try to explain or defense themselves against the rumors or people.

This is a frustrating and annoying way of working. I think if somebody has a problem or wrong feeling with an issue related to the thing he is sailing or driving or whatever he likes and there is a committee who is trying to get it in good lanes then you should ask one of the committee members about your concerns and not at the back of that committee to others who as also no any idea but heard the same rumor.

You always will get an answer from your committee where you are related to, if it is in your favor or not but at least you know what is going on from the right persons.

Well said Hans. It is very easy for people to get the wrong info OR to blow it out of context OR even worse still use what little snippets they do get as a tool to say i have a group of people that are frustrated.If You are frustrated by what the class is doing you attend meetings do proposals and then VOTE. Don't just think because 1 OR 2 people have a bee in there bonnet on a subject, we all should jump on board.And if the proposals get voted down it could be because there are other better ideas or it could be the costs involved OR it could be the fact that ,Why start to splinter a class when the glue isn't even dry on this class yet
I know that there is a LOT of work done behind the forums to keep this class strong and together BUT if people are going to keep on being bashed about the head for doing something they love then it wont be long till the class will self destruct Due to the lack of organisation.
Regards Richard

I think everyone should STFU and wait for the minutes to be published.

Those at the meeting know what was discussed. Those od us (me included) will have to wait for the official minutes.

Shall we talk about sailing ?

I'll be attending the bigest Cat event of the year in the UK calendar in 2 weeks time; we expect around 200 boats on 2 courses.

And there is Rugby to watch in the evening.



Oh, and we also might be having a meeting to discuss the RYA and cat sailing.

Hi Rolf.
I think you have forgotten John Pierce. His first ever sail on an A-Class was last October and his Stealth projects probably started in the late 90's as I ordered my Stealth'R' (Little Feat) in 2001. Since it's inception John has been a key person in the formulation of all things F16. The fact that he rarely posts on this Forum doesn't necessarily mean that he is not instrumental within the T.C

John is on the TC? Great! Just the kind of person/builder/sailor I think should be there. Otherwise, I intend to follow Simons advice and STFU about this until the minutes are published <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />