What is up with Mazda vs SCCA???

35 letters and e-mails?? I sent e-mails from everyone from Jim Julow to Terry Ozment and everyone in-between!! While I appreciate the tone of the letter, I'm waiting for the "proof in the pudding".

While I'm beginning to get into a ranting mood, I'd like to say that my e-mails weren't about the MSR package or any SS issues, but the fact that (it seems) that the SCCA front office reps were screwing the club members by biting the hand that feeds us, not only the Mazda TSP members, but the club as a whole from all of the $ they pump into it. Secondly, after sending 6-8 e-mails myself, I didn't receive a copy of this "receipt" e-mail.

Scott Franklin
just another cog in the machine.
 
Come on SCCA members 35 letters to the SCCA/President for a subject as this is nothing. I'm not talking about the Mazda SS/SCCA issues, I'm talking about the alleged comment from the vendor (BoD member) to the customer (SCCA member). & please don't any of you smoooooth talkers get on my case about not knowing the factual words to the SCCA member. A BoD member has zero business talking to a customer so as to piss off the customer. I'm one of the 35 who sent a polite letter. :D

My individual letters went to the President & each BoD member. Received a response fron the President & 6 BoD members.

IF YOUR GOING TO TALK THE TALK, HOW ABOUT YOU WALK THE WALK.

OR AS YOUNG LADIES TOLD YOU IN THE PAST YOUR ALL SHOW & NO GO.

Yea I'm pissed :mad1: because 35 letters shows that most of you don't give a dam about anything with the SCCA other than yourselves. :mad1: Send your friken letter.
 
As long as I have a wheel on the racing surface, I have not left the racing surface, and have not made an off course excursion. I am in fact very much ON the course. This can be modified in supplemental regs for a specific event if someone wants to prevent it, but the words written above do not prevent me from driving every corner with two wheels 4 feet in the grass, or dirt, or whatever is present inside (or outside) the curbing.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Sporting Regulations 2008 Version of General Competition Rules
6.8.3
The driver is required to follow the pavement or marked course during a competition.... (emphasis added).

Two wheels in the dirt/grass would be a VERY loose definition of following the pavement. The curbs, on the other hand, are part of the pavement, but might not be part of the marked course. You know - the white lines on the edge of the pavement at many courses/circuits.
 
Come on SCCA members 35 letters to the SCCA/President for a subject as this is nothing. I'm not talking about the Mazda SS/SCCA issues, I'm talking about the alleged comment from the vendor (BoD member) to the customer (SCCA member). & please don't any of you smoooooth talkers get on my case about not knowing the factual words to the SCCA member. A BoD member has zero business talking to a customer so as to piss off the customer. I'm one of the 35 who sent a polite letter. :D

My individual letters went to the President & each BoD member. Received a response fron the President & 6 BoD members.

IF YOUR GOING TO TALK THE TALK, HOW ABOUT YOU WALK THE WALK.

OR AS YOUNG LADIES TOLD YOU IN THE PAST YOUR ALL SHOW & NO GO.

Yea I'm pissed :mad1: because 35 letters shows that most of you don't give a dam about anything with the SCCA other than yourselves. :mad1: Send your friken letter.
[/b]
Click to expand...

David:

SETTLE DOWN. SERIOUSLY. For most of us, this is the first we are hearing of this and, since I'm not privvy to the survey or any of the other information, this is internet heresay. I'm not going to go flying off the handle from rumors that I have not researched (and do not have time to research). As a result, no letter will be written by me. If you have a problem with that, feel free to come and talk to me about it.
 
Sporting Regulations 2008 Version of General Competition Rules
6.8.3
The driver is required to follow the pavement or marked course during a competition.... (emphasis added).

Two wheels in the dirt/grass would be a VERY loose definition of following the pavement. The curbs, on the other hand, are part of the pavement, but might not be part of the marked course. You know - the white lines on the edge of the pavement at many courses/circuits.
[/b]
Click to expand...
You say tomato, I say tomato. If the car didn't leave the course, then it didn't leave the course.
 
Towards the end of the SSC race at the ruboffs, Heinricy put both left wheels of the Cobalt on the curbing at the apex of a right hand turn (T9, IIRC). Looked a little weird to me (and I'm a curb-hopping SOB), but apparently the officials had no problem with it. :)
 
Come on SCCA members 35 letters to the SCCA/President for a subject as this is nothing. I'm not talking about the Mazda SS/SCCA issues, I'm talking about the alleged comment from the vendor (BoD member) to the customer (SCCA member). & please don't any of you smoooooth talkers get on my case about not knowing the factual words to the SCCA member. A BoD member has zero business talking to a customer so as to piss off the customer. I'm one of the 35 who sent a polite letter. :D

My individual letters went to the President & each BoD member. Received a response fron the President & 6 BoD members.

IF YOUR GOING TO TALK THE TALK, HOW ABOUT YOU WALK THE WALK.

OR AS YOUNG LADIES TOLD YOU IN THE PAST YOUR ALL SHOW & NO GO.

Yea I'm pissed :mad1: because 35 letters shows that most of you don't give a dam about anything with the SCCA other than yourselves. :mad1: Send your friken letter.
[/b]
Click to expand...

I sent my second e-mail today, this one to Mr. Julow. I did get his response (much like the one posted previously) and I informed him that I didn't feel it address appropriately my original concern, which is the SCCA side of the incident mentioned in the Mazda survey. I included the exact text from the survey (again) and I copied the BoD email, my division BoD member and another BoD member that I know personally.

There are rules and expectation placed on all participants at SCCA events, including rules of conduct. If these were violated by a BoD member then there are procedures for such violations to be processed. All members should want to make sure that members of the Board are held to at least the same standard of conduct as the average driver or worker.
 
Bill, when Tim Buck of Mazda posts that this is what the BoD member said to him, I'll make book on Tim.

LMan, when Jim Julow says he & the SCCA BoD received 35 letters that's good enough for me. If you can please attempt to get a second respoonse from SCCA headquaters on how many letters the SCCA received have at it. I's also posibile that it Will be 95* in Wisconsin on Dec.1 st 2007, not very likely tho.

***These guys will be in town next week for the PRI show, Dave. I'll beat on 'em for ya.***

Greg, yer not telling me the whole BoD group is going to be there are you? NAW, you don't want to piss em off because that would be acting like one of the BoD members did to Tim Buck.

Andy, your BoD guy & my BoD chairman representive is one of the seven untouchables who didn't respond to my e-mail letter.

To those of you who didn't write a letter don't be shocked when a BoD member talks to you like he/she did to Tim. :o What better time to start cleaning house that RIGHT NOW. :cavallo:
 
"If the car didn't leave the course, then it didn't leave the course."



Yea, but the Rule says nothing about "leaving the course" - it requires you to follow the marked/paved course. If you are consistently making little pretense of following the course by creating your own in the dirt, I think you could be penalized.
 
If "follow the course" is defined as "follow the line," I can do that on either side of it.

Did I mention that I rented the "whole track?"

:026:

K
 
***If "follow the course" is defined as "follow the line," I can do that on either side of it.

Did I mention that I rented the "whole track?"****


By your definition of whole track, I presume you will not be upset when your side by side racing for a win & the competitior only leaves you room for only two tires on that hard black stuff while the other two tires are on the green stuff called grass. :rolleyes:

Do ya see what the Spherical bearing mounted in control arms has done to your mind. :blink:

ps: What does this definition of race track have to do with the original thread? More corruption just like the Spherical bearings.
 
LMan, when Jim Julow says he & the SCCA BoD received 35 letters that's good enough for me. If you can please attempt to get a second respoonse from SCCA headquaters on how many letters the SCCA received have at it. I's also posibile that it Will be 95* in Wisconsin on Dec.1 st 2007, not very likely tho.


[/b]
Click to expand...

Well, if only 35 letters were sent, it must not be a big issue, then. :birra:
 
***Well, if only 35 letters were sent, it must not be a big issue, then.***

Well LMan, when a BoD member runs his/her mouth to you please don't start squealing like a little pig looking for someone to listen. I'll throw you in the pot with all the other do gooders that think the SCCA BoD world is perfect. I have had a BoD member step WAY out of line with a letter addressed to me & each other BoD member. Details not required. I'm not saying that ALL BoD members function in like manner but I'm here to tell YOU some get out of line. In the case of the SCCA member who happens to be a Mazda employee I'll take his word that a SCCA BoD member out ran outside the boundry with his/her mouth. Plerase notice I didn't touch the SS issues, only that the SCCA member is a Mazda employee.

David Dewhurst
 
Easy, Tiger. I'm not absolving anyone, I'm just making an observation.

Fact: this incident you speak of occurred, and pages and pages of upset/outraged SCCA members went n and on about how it was inexcusable and that protests/letters/eccentri should be sent to Mr. Julow, REs, etc. I inferred from that that this was an official Big Deal ™.

Fact: after all that, Mr. Julow's (somewhat canned) response states he received 35 complaints. Since there was such a disparity between the apparent Internet outrage and the *actual* complaints received, I inferred two possibilities:

a. Many members are a lot more adept at Internet venom that in making actual complaints; or
b. Mr Julow understated the number of complaints, by accident or design.


Fact: When I decided to give the 'many members' the benefit of the doubt and only expressed the possibility (no accusation) that Mr Julow understated the number of complaints, you told me off that if by damn if Mr. Julow said there were 35 complaints, then there were only 35 complaints, end of story. Fine.

So, I then said that if that is true, then it must not be a crisis, and the official Big Deal ™ designation might need to be lifted. Now, you tell me off for reaching this opposite conclusion. :blink:

So, which is it? Big Deal™? Mr Julow really received a lot more complaints and aint tellin? They were lost? Or is it that many Internet forum-warriors can't be bothered to make actual complaints to those in charge?


Inquiring minds and all that.... I have no axe to grind.
 
***They were lost?***

The SCCA Headquartes in are noted for bad counting & or loosing letters. I have no facts, just years of reading on a couple sites & things usuall come out quite clear.

***Or is it that many Internet forum-warriors can't be bothered to make actual complaints to those in charge?***

That ^ is a FACT.

***Inquiring minds and all that.... I have no axe to grind.***

I hear you ^, have you ever heard Julow answer questions live when you were in a tent meeting at the Runoffs. :( I also have a very good friend who is a payed employee of the SCCA. < I hear truthful items. :( I also know Tim Buck & will take his word to the bank. :D

IMHU of the information the BoD member should a axed from all positions he/she holds with the SCCA.

David Dewhurst
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top