Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

[Edward M.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

If you, Ed Boyd or Ray Geiger had read the entire thread, you all would have seen POST # 15, where the question was already asked, yesterday at 14:38 EDT.

I saw it yesterday when it was posted.

My response was more of a philisophical one; There really are not any stupid questions, except the ones you don't ask.

Some people have problems with people that ask questions that have already been answered, some people don't. I suppose that is more of a personality issue than anything else.

[Larry T.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

If you, Ed Boyd or Ray Geiger had read the entire thread, you all would have seen POST # 15, where the question was already asked, yesterday at 14:38 EDT.

If the answers had clarified everything it probably would not have been asked again. I would like to see an answer that prescribes the full extent of the penalty. The answers thus far only explain the banning from the judging process for 13 months.

For me the relevent portion of the NCRS rules etc. quoted thus far in this thread are not acceptable in answering why TDB privileges have been revoked as well.

[Edward B.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

I am certainly sorry if my request for a citation and quotation of the applicable rules offended anyone, but I believe an examination of authority is critical in situations such as these. When I posted the request I had indeed read the entire thread including posts #15 and #21. Since the quotation from the Sixth Edition of the JRM set forth in post #21 reads, ". . . a 13 month suspension of the owner from any NCRS judging process," it was and is beyond me to understand how the admitted infraction resulted in a banishment from the website without there being some additional language to justify such sanction. Accordingly, whether my inquiry be labeled "stupid" or not, I persist with the request that someone supply me with the language that justifies removal from the website for an action that occured on the judging field.

[Frederick W.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

IMO, banning the member from the TDB is/was wrong, both in terms of common sense as well as, apparently, the written rules/penalties.
This is unfair to the member and casts the NCRS in an unfavorable light.
The member should receive the proscribed punishment of exclusion from NCRS judging events for 13 months. No less and no more.

[William C.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

I'd suggest that you might want to look at section 27, Behavior, before making conclusions as to appropriate sanctions.

[Jerry W.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

Fiddle Sticks....I've been on a two day Harvey Dickerson ride and wasn't aware of this situation....I was looking forward to a report from Roy on his road trip trip and some pics of the event...Fiddle Sticks

The suspension is ok by the rules...The TDB is not i think.

Next thing you know....This post will be locked.

[Joe C.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

I'd suggest that you might want to look at section 27, Behavior, before making conclusions as to appropriate sanctions.

Thank you.

[Mark D.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

Fiddle Sticks...Fiddle Sticks

Whoa, whoa...watch the language, sir. This is a family oriented site:-)

[Jim D.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

I'd suggest that you might want to look at section 27, Behavior, before making conclusions as to appropriate sanctions.

Section 27 starts out saying "During the judging process....".
Roy stated that when he left, "The judging was done and people were cleaning up after the judges left".
So how is that applicable?

[John G.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

The 'one penalty' seems to be the sticking point.
Also banning Roy from the TDB denies his experience and knowledge base from other forum members seeking advice and/or info on early vintage year cars. In this regard all get 'penalized', IMO.

I believe this is from the Sixth Edition of the JRM:
"owners prematurely removing cars from the judging field will nullify any award received and result in a 13 month suspension of the owner from any NCRS judging process".

The rule appears to be pretty clear. No mention of 'other' sanction(s). Semantics? ..

They say "rules are rules" and then are too hard headed to read and understand their own rules. This clearly states that he is to be suspended from any JUDGING process. Clearly and concisely. There is no court in this land that would include the discussion board and other social activities in the ban.

And to Terry, I think this is exactly the place where issues such as this should be aired and debated.

George

Perhaps politics and technical issues shouldn't share the same space, but...................given the 'weight' of this issue, I agree with George.

[Mike G.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

i read all the stuff on corvette forum. i am a member there too and used that forum long before i used this one. all the verbal attacks on the NCRS after only hearing one side of the story reminds me why i dont go there anymore.
that said, i wish somehow the ncrs would let roy back on the tdb. i have dealt with roy before for some 55 help. he is good for the tdb if you ask me. i understand the 13 months but dont think the tdb is the same thing. if you say or do something bad on the tdb then you should be removed but not for something you did at a show.

[Wayne M.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

....I was looking forward to a report from Roy on his road trip trip and some pics of the event...

The suspension is ok by the rules...The TDB is not i think. ....

Agree, Jerry --- here's a pic of the culprit () wiping down his car in the wash area, at Bend OR, a week ago.

[Jeff G.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

I have to agree with Mike. Roy has been nothing but helpful to me and is an asset to the board. I know there are not very many 55 owners on here but for the ones that are, we will be punished as well by not having him able to post. I hope the powers that be can take a second look at this because not being able to attend NCRS functions punishes Roy. But not being on the forums punishes the rest of us that really appreciate his knowledge of the 55's.

[Frederick W.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

My post earlier today was deleted, for no apparent reason.
Anyone else?

[Stuart F.]

Re: Roy Braatz #182 Rant on CF

First; I don't believe what Roy posted on the CF can be called a "RANT". He simply and humbly stated what had happened to him, and few of us would have known otherwise.

Second; For many of us old timers, a 13 month punishment could mean you will never see or hear from us again. Any and all knowledge that we can impart from our "Back in the Day" experiences will be lost from the NCRS historic data base. We will be relegated to the National Corvette Retirees Society for good.

We just lost Charlie a short while ago, and now today Tom Stanton left us. I would hate to see Roy banished for the minor indiscretions of an old Tooter.

Stu Fox