[roc-chat] Re: Range Safety and Aircraft
- From: "Rick D." <rocketrick@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 16:35:35 -0700
On Mon, May 28, 2018, 3:52 PM Richard Dierking <applerocketry@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I think this developed when ROC became less of a team and more person
dependent.
Strangely, I've seen the exact opposite.
ROC started as very person-dependent. Seven specific people, in fact.
Originally, the board members did, quite literally, everything. The same
seven people, for years and years, did everything, from building the pads
and launch system, to customizing and then towing the trailer to every
launch.
Eventually, some of them left the board, either through health issues
(including death), work constraints, moving away, or other reasons. New
blood joined the board, and new ideas started being explored (such as,
"maybe we ought to become an actual non-profit organization", and "perhaps
we'd have new volunteers for the board if we acted like we wanted them,
rather than just asking people to raise their hands at ROCstock once a year
to keep the old crew running the show").
As a direct result of ROC becoming more team-focused, and open to new
ideas, we are now an actual non-profit, hold yearly elections for one third
of the board, and now also have a fantastic wireless launch system, two new
smaller trailers that almost anyone can tow, storage facilities mere
minutes from the launch site, much higher waivers, a yearly youth-focused
launch that has seen growth almost every year, and a board that has, over
time, had quite a few new folks join it, giving it fresh perspectives and
new ideas on a regular basis.
Yeah, I know that was one huge sentence. Sorry.
But seriously, Richard. I think ROC has come a long way in a good
direction, and I'm tired of you bashing it any time someone questions the
utility of one of your suggestions.
I'm no longer on the board, but I know from my time serving on it that they
have the duty to question everything, in order to figure out how and when
it's appropriate to spend the club's money, and in what.
I'm not saying your suggestion is without merit. I'm saying that, just
because the folks in charge are doing due diligence to see if the proposal
makes sense to implement, they're not *bad*, or out to get you, or insular
and out of touch. They're simply doing what they should be doing: talking
out the pros and cons of what was suggested.
Thinly-veiled insults won't make your suggestions more likely to be
implemented.
Fortunately, given that every single current board member is a fair and
honorable person, thinly-veiled insults probably won't make them any less
likely to be implemented, either. They'll get a fair evaluation, and a
decision will be made by the board.
Cheers,
Rick "_I_ never resigned mid-term"* Dickinson
*: Not very thinly-veiled
Other related posts:
