FV80 wrote:Dave,
In light of your post, would it be reasonable to say that anything posted by the CRB for input has already been given "consideration" by the CRB and it will PROBABLY go through ... unless LOTS of (detailed) argumentative letters are received?
No, not at all. There are times when we receive proposals/questions from members that (after going through the appropriate advisory committee) get rejected immediately (this happens a lot); there are times when proposals are so blindingly obviously sensible that we put them out as recommended changes (or in the case of out-and-out specification errors as Tech Bulletin changes); then there are the "tweeners" that we just aren't sure about and we put them out as recommendations to see what kind of inputs we get from the membership. In those cases that are blindingly obvious, most of the time we're right and we get a handful or less of comments; but sometimes we get some real objections because we really did overlook something. You may not have noticed, but there are times when the CRB requests the BoD to ignore previous recommendations (basically, that says, we've reconsidered based on member input). In those cases where we aren't sure, we tend to get more responses, but not always. Despite what some people have claimed, the advisory committees and the CRB really do read the member inputs. And, excepting the totally irrational flames we sometimes get, we take them seriously. Sometimes, because there is real division between the members of an affected group, we have to make a choice and no matter which choice we make, some portion of that group will be unhappy with us. That's why we get the big bucks. (Yeah, we wish.) And, finally, there are sometimes larger issues, not apparent to the members, that sway us one way or another.
Can we "read anything into" the exact wording of rules proposals as presented in FasTrack? Are there any guidelines that you can offer for the masses to consider when deciding whether they should go to the effort to send something to the CRB about a proposal?
I don't think so. We aren't trying to hide anything between the lines. We (as I indicated above) may have missed something in our own deliberations and, if we have, we are relying on the members to tell us about those things. It is the case, that simple "Yes" or "No" responses carry less weight (at least for me - I can't speak to everyone's mind set) than a reasoned response. And, for me, the "leave us alone, its been fine for umpty years" is not a reasoned response. Not all change is bad.
Dave
