Re; Reply To Mr. Sinor

[Joe C.]

Again, this is the THIRD time that I cannot post a reply, but I can, however post a new thread, so here goes:

Roy:

I appreciate your candor. Something in your response tells me that we both might be on the same side.

Believe me, as I said before, I am a traditionalist. I absolutely DO NOT want to tear down the bulwarks of our wonderful organization. If we can accommodate a seperate class of beautifully prepared automobiles, then we will IMHO, not only rekindle interest in the NCRS, but will welcome those that have been shut out by recent developments. The key word here, is REPRESENTATION. If we can institute a seperate judging class, then we will allow all of those folks who have painstakingly prepared their cars, at much time and expense, to re-enter the NCRS brotherhood, albeit in a different class/level.

This accomplishes 3 things, IMHO:

1. Allows the owner to state any "enhancements" that have been added.

2. Relieves any tension, and/or possible litigation due to misrepresentation.

3. Permits those folks who have spent much time, money, and energy in faithfully restoring their Covrette to share in the Process that makes the NCRS a special part of Americana.

Roy, I know that there are a lot of folks who willfully misrepresent their cars. There are also quite a few folks who have been duped by a predatory seller. Shouldn't we welcome these innocent people into our ranks?

As far as resale value goes, I, for one would pay far more for a very desirable "NCRS Top Flite--Enhanced" car, than for an ugly duckling "NCRS Top Flite--Original" car. Then again, we are not in the resale business.

Please, Roy, remember that you once had the same idea as I now have. I will help you, and the Organization in any way I can in order to insure our survival. Without people like us, then the USA will be taken over by the ricers, and their ilk.

Last evening,I spent a lot of time on the telephone with our president, and one of our newest Regional Directors. Although they did not disagree with me, they did refer me back to you. Apparently, Roy, you are held in very high esteem by your brother board members. Please go with your gut. Again, I say that I stand ready to help to engineer a solution if you decide to "grab the bull by the horns".

Best,
Joe

[Patrick H.]

Re: Re; Reply To Mr. Sinor

Joe,

I see that you're actually posting twice each of these three times. I'm not sure if your browser isn't refreshing or what, but your posts are all where you intended them to be as well as a new thread.

Patrick

[Joe C.]

Re: Re; Reply To Mr. Sinor

Thanks Pat. I'll take another look. I have written to John Waggoner three times about this, but the problem persists. Because I am speaking my mind, and probably alienating many members, I 'spose that I am a bit paranoid.

Doctor: You and I have had our differences in the past. Please believe me, all of my more recent posts are in no way meant to diminish the stature of our wonderful organization. It is my sincere intent, to try to tailor the NCRS to the twenty first century.

I believe very strongly in the principle of fairness and honesty. I will readily forfeit my membership (number32899) if we cannot ferret out any automobiles that have previously been erroniously "honored" with Top Flite/ Duntov /McClelland accolades.

[Tom R.]

Re: Re; Reply To Mr. Sinor

Joe:

I've been attempting to follow these threads and capture the essence of what is being asking for but must admit I've failed to comprehend it. I have a tendency to glaze over at the point in which the emotional discharges spew and problably missed the substance.

You've defined the objectives but without writing the manual, can you describe this "New" class you would like to see instituted? Thanks.

[Roy S.]

Re: Re; Reply To Mr. Sinor

Joe,

I posted a response last night at approximatel 6:30 to Todd, regarding your original post on this subject. Read that post and see if the two of you can put the project together.

[Joe C.]

Re: Re; Reply To Mr. Sinor

Tom:

All of the fine points would have to be worked out. Essentially, I am proposing a new class. Lets call it "Top Flite, Enhanced", or "Top Flite, Modified" or something similar. What I am proposing, is that the owner shall state any changes that have been done to the car (i.e. engine upgrade, color change, etc), and the car shall be judged to the same standards as an original car. If the owner is not aware that his car has been altered, and presents his car for Top Flite-Original judging, and the Process reveals an alteration that was not apparent to the owner, then the owner shall have the option, either to withdraw his car from the Process, or to continue the judging in the new Class. Of course, there will still be those that will try to misrepresent their entries. Dealing with that category will be the hardest issue to deal with.

That is the simplified version, and how I see it now. I hope I answered your question.

Joe

[Joe C.]

Re: Re; Reply To Mr. Sinor

OK Roy. Thanks. I'll give it my best.

Joe

[Reba Whittington]

Re: Declaration of alterations

The declaration that you propose is already on the car entry sheet that the owner has to sign. (so-called green sheet) Most owners ignore it. I have been a judging chair for five years now and have only had one owner declare anything on it--and that was for a sportsman entry.

[Tom R.]

Re: Re; Reply To Mr. Sinor

I think you'll have to work on the concept a little bit more...sounds more like a 2nd or 3rd Flight rather than a Top flight anything. And then I guess if its a modified...where does it stop?

In a recent club event where C5s outnumbered all other generations combined...we broke them out by stock C5, C5 Cosmetic (bezels and ornamentation) and C5 Modified (paint non-stock hoods, ground effects and other cosmetics). Give everybody a chance at a trophy.

Frankly however...I couldn't see myself judging such a class for any generation but I take it there are those that would...and that's the challenge Roy has thrown your way.

It's a stretch but then the solid axle guys had to go through that when C2s were introduced for judging to say nothing of the late model C3s!

[Joe C.]

Re: Declaration of alterations

Reba:

I am not very familiar with the legal/logistical issues of judging. I am just a gearhead who enjoys diagnosing problems and trying to help folks with the details of their restoration. If that clause appears on the entry sheet, then we can use that as a starting point in defining the new class. At the very least, we can expand the wording, and REQUIRE the owner to sign it. We can also add the wording; "failure of OWNER to sign will disqualify the entry from Flight-Original judging. The OWNER still has the option of entering the vehicle in Enhanced (Modified) Flight judging" ,or words to that effect. Again, these are just ideas, but if the proposal is accepted, then the details can surely be worked out.

In the case where the owner does not voluntarily enter his car in the Flight-Enhanced category, and he/she wishes to have his/her car so judged, then the judges will determine, during the Process, what has been altered. The three that come to mind immediately are, color change, engine change, and non-original sidepipes. Maybe there are others, but I believe that they are not readily determined in an undocumented car. The three above are very apparent to most judges at the Regional level.

Joe

[Joe C.]

PS

There MUST be a limit on max allowable number of changes (enhancements?) that will be accepted.

[Joe C.]

PPS

Cars awarded Top Flite-Enhanced status will NOT be eligible for Duntov/McClellan judging, regardless of their final score.

Cars recieving Flite-Enhanced awards will be eligible for PV judging.

[Joe C.]

Re: Re; Reply To Mr. Sinor

Tom:

If this thing flies, then LOTS of details would have to be worked out. One of the most important is severely limiting the number of changes that would be acceptable. After all, we don't exactly want Chuck Barris as our new National Judging Chairman.

Joe

[Joe C.]

Correction

You know I meant to say George Barris. Been watching too many Gong Show reruns.

Joe