I didnt delete it....

If I were a new racer reading this, I might consider walking and look for something else.

Some good points are being made, but it’s my opinion in many of the exchanges Glenn and Al are only working to try and discredit Matt rather than listen and not trying to grasp what is being stated….
If these two Directors were really wanting to work with Matt or anyone that had issues they would be engaging in constructive exchanges rather than quoting past statement and past experiences that would only work against some type of discussion based logical solutions. (That is my opinion)

With that said, I know the history… and these two Directors had their minds made up well before this thread was started.

Crap like this makes me want to lock my shop and toss the key!

DD

See Mitch, its really all about Adam here. :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glenn

Does anyone here have an illegal car?

---

Yes, I do - maybe. Missing the upper dash trim piece. Why is it part of the "dash"/"dashboard" but the stock instrument cluster/radio/AC control isn't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Al

I will do my best to publisize all of the decisions we make along the way along with who was involved. Hopefully that transparency will help and if nothing else give you guys more ammo with which to rib the other guys

---

I asked Al about this in a email, while seeking clarification of the penalty.

I guess we can watch the Rules section for: "Car found to be missing dash per 7.8.7 and is penailzed XXXX"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donovan

If I were a new racer reading this, I might consider walking and look for something else.

---

No you wouldn't, not if you wanted to race pony cars. If you just wanted to race anything you'd be in Spec Miata. This beats the pants of American Sedan.

Maybe Mitch is more right than I want to give him credit for. When I started looking at the group I was interested in some of the back stories of what really went on; guess I have enough hutzpah to give it a go or just not enough sense to walk away.

This is still the best sandbox, but the learning curve is pretty steep. I don't necessarily care if Al/Glenn/Todd/Clifton have their minds made up IF I understand what they're going to do and it's consistent.

We may hate the short off season but all this goes better over BBQ, beer, and sippin' to-kill-ya after a day in a hot, smelly, live axle race car.

Anybody with a 4th gen upper interior cowl panel for sale cheap?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fbody383

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glenn

Does anyone here have an illegal car?

---

Yes, I do - maybe. Missing the upper dash trim piece. Why is it part of the "dash"/"dashboard" but the stock instrument cluster/radio/AC control isn't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Al

I will do my best to publisize all of the decisions we make along the way along with who was involved. Hopefully that transparency will help and if nothing else give you guys more ammo with which to rib the other guys

---

I asked Al about this in a email, while seeking clarification of the penalty.

I guess we can watch the Rules section for: "Car found to be missing dash per 7.8.7 and is penailzed XXXX"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donovan

If I were a new racer reading this, I might consider walking and look for something else.

---

No you wouldn't, not if you wanted to race pony cars. If you just wanted to race anything you'd be in Spec Miata. This beats the pants of American Sedan.

Maybe Mitch is more right than I want to give him credit for. When I started looking at the group I was interested in some of the back stories of what really went on; guess I have enough hutzpah to give it a go or just not enough sense to walk away.

This is still the best sandbox, but the learning curve is pretty steep. I don't necessarily care if Al/Glenn/Todd/Clifton have their minds made up IF I understand what they're going to do and it's consistent.

We may hate the short off season but all this goes better over BBQ, beer, and sippin' to-kill-ya after a day in a hot, smelly, live axle race car.

Anybody with a 4th gen upper interior cowl panel for sale cheap?

---

Need more guys like you... :D

Al, again, you are taking shots at me attempting to shoot holes in my theory that the "old NASA formula" is no longer needed, but you are holding onto it too tight. I still can't believe you and Glenn have finally put in print in this thread that which has been an untold MYSTERY for 5 years. I'm shocked, but it's GREAT to know now.

Businesses that achieve success must ALWAYS take a look at themselves from the outside every couple of years and ADJUST to TODAY's market. This is why you see CEO's get shitcanned all the time because they can't operate in the new market. They aren't comfortable and have no way or will to change. yes, there is a hidden message there.

NASA did a great job of getting started. I'm happy for that. Today, NASA is successful and drawing racers from Koni Challenge, World Challenge and elsewhere. It isn't just a small sandbox anymore and whether you like it or not, is a PRO RACING SERIES.....that because of the racers who race here....have a damn good time and is 99% of the time is fun as all hell, but that 1% seems to sour quickly. It's time to change and become what NASA could be. I'm merely suggesting, as a quasi stockholder, change the policies, or change the CEO.

And AL, you are probably confused as hell because you have never taken the time to know ME or what my agenda/game plan is because someone planted some preconceived notion about me into you head long ago who also doesn't know me. Those that have taken the time to actually LISTEN to my reasoning, usually say "hell yeah!". Quit reading every 5th word and quit assuming I'm here to tear things down. I'm looking for improvement over the past...even suggested a few things to do so. They happen to contradict YOUR plan. Either you are taking it personally (I see that, i've been a little harsh on a few things) or you are unable to adjust your brain. It happens.

I do have some VERY angry answers to your questions, but I ain't going to stoop back down to that level again. It's pointless at this juncture and I do realize it's been misinterpreted as hate or very childish in the past. I'm beyond that, I think I now fully understand Al...

As for tech being a pain in the ass and taking up a lot of time...well, any serious AI racer who knows the rules could 80% tech an AI car from 10 feet away in less than 3 minutes. The other 15% requires a tape measure and toe plates and some sealing leads/tapes with a follow up a few days after the event at the dyno of the competitor's choice. 4% is knowing your racers and their ability to build a car or perpensity to stretch the rules and 1% is sleeping with ECU's and knowing how people cheat. It's not rocket science, it just requires some committed effort and a plan.

So instead of trying to figure ME out and make me look like a lunatic, look to the future. those guys dropping 80-150k on AI cars and showing up at your events with semi's are gonna keep coming... The old way is going to get ugly brother..... just my $0.02.

Thanks Donovan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donovan

If I were a new racer reading this, I might consider walking and look for something else.

Some good points are being made, but it’s my opinion in many of the exchanges Glenn and Al are only working to try and discredit Matt rather than listen and not trying to grasp what is being stated….
If these two Directors were really wanting to work with Matt or anyone that had issues they would be engaging in constructive exchanges rather than quoting past statement and past experiences that would only work against some type of discussion based logical solutions. (That is my opinion)

With that said, I know the history… and these two Directors had their minds made up well before this thread was started.

Crap like this makes me want to lock my shop and toss the key!

DD

---

I am trying to discredit Matt, but only where he is not telling the trueth or the whole trueth. I want to work w/ Matt, but all the mud slinging isnt helping. Matt has constantly attacked me where not once have i attacked him. And we cant follow Matt's wants and desires and follow David's wants and desires, and follow ....... keep going till all names have been added. Get my point. We could have every person here named as a Director and we would still be here doing this. At some point we have to draw a line in the sand and say, "This is the way to Paradise, follow me if you want to live forever!".
Also, so far it really seems like Matt is speaking for everyone here, but that's a big assumption on my part when none of you speak up and say so. If so many folks agree w/ him, why are we only hearing from him? A simple, "I agree w/ Matt XX%." would go a long ways to making the change he wants."

As i said before, we all are so very close in what we want. The middle is some place beween The Directors and Matt. How far each of us is from that is not that far apart when you look at it from a POV NASA vs. SCCA or other sanctioning bodies. It really is a matter of "splitting hairs" at this point. But when you zoom in and only look at it from a POV of just AI/CMC Texas, you start to see things in more detail. We are now focusing on those details. We have moved from the 2003 AI/CMC season of 1 event weeeknd w/ like 3 cars (none of which were legal AI/CMC cars) to fields of possibly 57 cars w/ closer to 99% rules compliance.

And David D., constructive exchanges take place via phone or face to face. Niether of which Matt is willing have w/ me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fbody383

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glenn

Does anyone here have an illegal car?

---

Yes, I do - maybe. Missing the upper dash trim piece. Why is it part of the "dash"/"dashboard" but the stock instrument cluster/radio/AC control isn't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Al

I will do my best to publisize all of the decisions we make along the way along with who was involved. Hopefully that transparency will help and if nothing else give you guys more ammo with which to rib the other guys

---

I asked Al about this in a email, while seeking clarification of the penalty.

I guess we can watch the Rules section for: "Car found to be missing dash per 7.8.7 and is penailzed XXXX"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donovan

If I were a new racer reading this, I might consider walking and look for something else.

---

No you wouldn't, not if you wanted to race pony cars. If you just wanted to race anything you'd be in Spec Miata. This beats the pants of American Sedan.

Maybe Mitch is more right than I want to give him credit for. When I started looking at the group I was interested in some of the back stories of what really went on; guess I have enough hutzpah to give it a go or just not enough sense to walk away.

This is still the best sandbox, but the learning curve is pretty steep. I don't necessarily care if Al/Glenn/Todd/Clifton have their minds made up IF I understand what they're going to do and it's consistent.

We may hate the short off season but all this goes better over BBQ, beer, and sippin' to-kill-ya after a day in a hot, smelly, live axle race car.

Anybody with a 4th gen upper interior cowl panel for sale cheap?

---

I know you have that part missing. And if it was Matt's way, you would have "fun run" all of 2009. Your not the only one who has this type of issue. There are several. But we know of those (for the most part) are are trying to work w/ them on correcting those issues.
You have had way more than enough time to resolve your issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AI#97

NASA did a great job of getting started. I'm happy for that. Today, NASA is successful and drawing racers from Koni Challenge, World Challenge and elsewhere. It isn't just a small sandbox anymore and whether you like it or not, is a PRO RACING SERIES.....that because of the racers who race here....have a damn good time and is 99% of the time is fun as all hell, but that 1% seems to sour quickly. It's time to change and become what NASA could be. I'm merely suggesting, as a quasi stockholder, change the policies, or change the CEO.

---

You have no idea how much you sound like me back in 2005 while talking to Adam and Todd about the way the series was being run back then. But I learned that there is a method to the madness.
If we compair tech/rules compliance to a switch. For you, you want a "on/off" switch. Its pretty clear you want us to move from whatever worked to get us started, to what you want today. For me, i see it (now) as a 20 position rotary switch. Slowly working my way from zero tech/rule compliance (2003-2004) to 50-60% rules compliance (2005-2006 - just an example, not a fact) to 80-90% rules compliance in 2007-2008, to where we are now.
I realize we are not moving in time w/ your expected timeline. Todd and Adam wasn't either back in 2005 w/ my expected timeline. The announcement of the 2006 Nationals caught those two off guard (w/ regards to rules compliance) and they had to do the two step shuffle to get our group not only up to speed, but on the same page w/ the rest of the country. Its a work in progress. We have only had 4 National events. The 1st one was a cluster w/ regards to rules compliance and interpretation. The 2nd, was much better. The 3rd and 4th we pretty much 100% compliant.
The point is, we are working towards a common goal, all be it at a different pace than what a few want.

The pole tells me, we need to hit that next "click" on the rotary switch.

We are boiling a frog here guys. I can see the frog jumping out due to turning up the heat too quick, but not from turing it up too slowly. According to the pole, its time to boil the frog.

Well David, like Glenn said, you cant have it both ways. You cannot correct something that has been posted that is not correct without also discrediting the original poster. I've not attacked Matt personally, just tried to correct where he was wrong and asked for clarification when he's contradicted himself.

Similarly, you cannot have more tech inspections without also dedicating more of the racer's weekend to vehicle disassembly and to inspections. You cannot use racers for tech inspection resources without encroaching on their time and potentially antagonizing others under the whole issue of "my competition is being allowed to disect my car". You also cannot ensure adherence to the rules without tech inspections. Balance is key.

No Matt, I do not agree that AI or CMC are professional level racing series. They are ammateur level racing series. The target audience is not Dean Martin, the one guy I know of that has come down from a true pro league to race with us, though it is cool to see that happen. The target audience are the guys we have! Regular guys with regular jobs with a love for cars that want to go out on weekends and race, and drive their hearts out, and hang out with other lunatics like themselves. The fact that some of them can afford to show up with a spare car and a full 18wheeler is not, IMHO, relevant. I understand you want NASA and AI to "step up" to being SCCA's and A-sedan's little brother. I dont, and I have not been informed by NASA that they do either. As for your call for me to be replaced...you're entitled to your opinion. Get the support of our fellow racers and contact Lindsey or Kunzman at HQ. I'm sure they'll tell you car count is king and will happily give me the boot once you prove to them what a miserable job I do.

As for tech...I do agree sometimes we're a little more lax than we should be, though certainly we've done more in 2009 than in previous years. We scale cars just about every race, and inspect one maybe two items half of the races. Some weekends Glenn and I walk around and inspect one thing on every car in the paddock.

What I would like to do in 2010 is as follows:
1) We create a list of several tech items including how to perform the inspection.
2) We hand that to NASA TX tech and tell them to pick at random which of those items to look for. This eliminates "us" as racers from knowing ahead of time which specific item is going to be checked.
3) NASA TX tech performs the inspection and calls us over if something looks suspect to them, and we make a decision accordingly.
4) We log what has been done and to whom and alter the list for the following weekend so that over time everything we want to have looked at is looked at and things that we want repeated are repeated.

This requires more from NASA TX than we've had in the past. Recently it was just Jonathan, and a lot of times he doesnt have the hardware we need. To put it into perspective, at nationals we'd check three or four items and we had something like four tech inspectors. Shannon has told me of her intent to staff up tech to help enable exactly what I've stated. If that happens it means not having to ask our racers to perform tech. We'll see, it'll be a work in progress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GlennCMC70

...speak up and say so.

---

Please do not assume I have the time or inclination to read 7 pages of ramblings and try to make sense of it. When you all figure out where you want to be make a decision...If I like it I will stay. If I don't I will leave (and not post and post and post and post). 'nuff said.