A Brief Candidate Statement

[RoyL]

I thought it was worthwhile to post a brief statement as to why I have put my name forward for the IOM Technical positon.

Mainly, I believe the class needs a change in direction and attitude.

I believe that the role of the Technical Sub Committee should be to serve the needs of the class owners and the NCAs. I believe that all of its business should be conducted in the open and that all actions and proposed actions and the ideas and people behind them shoud be fully disclosed.

I believe that only in the most extraordinary circumstances should the Technical Sub Committee act on its own accord and propose new rules or interpretations. I particularly believe that any ruling that would make current boats or equipment illegal should be carefully considered and only reluctantly enacted.

I have no special or farvored relationship with any manufacturer or supplier. In my time in the IOM Class I have purchased and used boats and equipment from Jeff Byerly, Martin Firebrace, Jon Elmaleh, JR, Graunpner, Futaba, HiTec, RMG, Black Magic, Sails Etc., Ian Vickers, Brad Gibson and Mike Eldred among others.

If elected to this position, I will make it my first priority to enact a "sail certification" program that was promised to the class years ago. I will also focus on the issue of sail numbering and identificaiton in the hope of both clarifying and simplfying the present system.

Finally, I promise to work to make the IOM Executive and all our rules and regulations serve the needs and desires of the class and its members. I do not believe in rules for rules sake and I strongly believe in free and active discussion and welcome open criticsm.

I would be glad to answer any questions publically on this forum or by private message.

Thanks for your consideration.

Roy Langbord USA

[Greg Willis]

Hi Skippers and IOM owners,
Some thoughts on where we are going and what we were promised with IOMICA.
We were promised a voice, control of our class and a say in our direction. We currently have a great system, structure and foundation to fulfill our original expectations. (Just a fantastic job by the past and current executive members) Unfortunately we also have a perception (right or wrong) that we are not as transparent as promised and that we may have the opinions of a few overriding the need and desires of the majority of skippers. We must realise that we are just over 2000 owners and have (based on our forum posts) less than 20% of owners wanting to provide feedback and comment to our current executive. If we want to develop and improve our class we need more feed back. Without dwelling on the past, let me assure all owners that my style is simple and if elected as IOMICA chairman you can expect the following.
• Totally transparent communications from all elements of our association.
• No more confidential communication involving executive decisions. (We are too small an association with non commercial objectives to need closed door discussions.)
• All opinions expressed by me will be posted as a personal opinion only.
• All communications from the chairman will reflect the consensus of those members that care to voice their thoughts either on the forum or directly to the executive.
• Changes and documents will not be ratified without full debate (please see my comment on the "Event Management thread"
I am not particularly interested in allowing protocol get in the way of member’s wishes.
I do not have the time to become a sounding board or point of reference (which we have enjoyed from the current executive) but will logically promote discussion and resolution of quarries by the executive that is elected in September.
If you think my proposed style of administration can make a difference and reflect an owner driven IOMICA please support my nomination.
I believe that clarity, consistency and transparency needs to be the basis of a sustainable and enjoyable class.
Cheers
Greg Willis
AUS 41

[Roy Thompson]

Hi RoyL

I will make it my first priority to enact a "sail certification" program that was promised to the class years ago. I will also focus on the issue of sail numbering and identificaiton in the hope of both clarifying and simplfying the present system

Are you refering to the self certification of sails by manufacturers? In my position as VC Measurements I was involved a bit in this theme. Most of the comments on the forum and that I recieved from manufacturers, big and small, were somewhat negative. The additional work and costs involved didn't seem to bring them the equivalent benefits. The benefits to end users are also limited although enticing and worth pushing for.

What exactly do you see as the 'issue' of sail numbering? The biggest problem I see is the lack of implementation of the rules at events, where the race Committee don't support the Event Measurer regarding poor -almost illegible numbering. The rules regarding sail numbering themselves are quite straightforward, no? Spacing, size, position and legibility are all clearly stated and are measureable and should not be subject to subjective decisions.
(Maybe we need to clear up the age old problem of 18 and 81, 08 and 80 - why the heck do we need to put the 0 in 08 anyway?- but if skippers/observers/umpires etc could remember that the stb numbers are above the port ones, this would not be a problem).

Just some thoughts...