Regeländerung

(09.11.2011)

Hallo Ihr alle,

im Anhang seht Ihr das offizielle Endergebnis der Epoxy-Abstimmung, so wie ich es gerade von Chris per Mail zugesandt bekommen habe. Zukünftig ist damit der Einsatz von Epoxy beim Bau von Contenderrümpfen generell erlaubt.

Andreas


Ergänzung vom 09.12.2011

heute kam die Bestätigung der ISAF zur Regeländerung - sie ist bereits online.
Die Info von Chris dazu:

Hi Guys,
Just a quick note to say that ISAF have finally published the new rules which can be found here http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/CON2012CR081111-[11716].pdf

Hi All,
 
sorry to take so long to get the results of the ballot out. It was close and took a lot of counting, anyway the results are as follows.
 
FOR               236
AGAINST    113
 
result = PASS
 
Please pass this result onto your National Members and builders at your earliest convenience.
I will inform ISAF and get the rules changes accordingly
 
kindest regards

Chris Boshier


Und hier noch ein paar erklärende Worte von Chris über die Probleme, die es bei dieser Abstimmung gab:

We did have an issue around the ballot, mainly that 3 NA's sent in more votes than they had declared members at the 1st of June this year.
We wanted to ascertain whether these were genuine members of the National Associations and as such whether their votes should be included.

As you may be aware, for many years now the individual members have not been accounted for to the ICA according to the association rules.
We wanted to ensure this vote was as fair as possible taking into account the member of all the national associations.
This is why we took longer counting the vote than would seem reasonable since the close of the vote at the beginning of the month.

Und hier noch ein paar Erläuterungen wie der Vorstand der ICA das Problem gelöst hat und zukünftig solche Probleme vermeiden möchte:

Currently our rules do not state when you join and when you get a vote,
the current (relevant) rules we have are as follows

A.4.a.1 Full Membership shall be open to any Full Member of a National Association who is the owner of an International Contender or, in the case of joint owners, to any one of them, or, in the case of an International Contender owned by a corporation or association, to a nominated representative of that organization, provided that payment of the prescribed annual subscription of the National Association has been made and such annual contribution to the Association as hereinafter has been made by the National Association

A.4.d. Each Full Member shall be entitled to one vote at a General Meeting of the Association or in a postal ballot. Associate and Honorary members shall be entitled to attend and speak at any General Meeting, but not to vote

b.6 Any members who join a National Association after the 30 May, but before 31 December will still be liable for the full general levy to The Association for that year. It is the responsibility of the National Association to advise the Association of the names of late joiners. The levy should be paid to The Association with the levy due in the following year.

Our thinking was that not the fault of individual members that the NA's haven't sent us the names of or dates when the members joined, as none of the NA's have ever provided lists.

current thinking is two fold

1) enforce rule b6 with the lists of members and when they join the NAs
2) amend the rules around ballots so that to be entitled to vote in a ballot you must be a member at the time of the AGM.
We anguished over what to do for several weeks before coming to a conclusion.

The decision was to uphold the vote as the builders and buyers were at a standstill, had we gone for a revote from the NA's we also would have had to request lists of members and at a minimum this would have delayed proceedings by another couple of weeks on top of another 3 months, which would have held any building up until March 2012 and would probably hurt the class and the builders more than necessary.
It was also though that if we cancelled the vote and left it until the next AGM (which is only 5 months away) there was no reason for it not to be represented which would leave another 3 months awaiting the outcome of yet another ballot.

I hope this helps you understand what happened and how we came to the decision.



Tja, was soll man dazu sagen? Wenn es Lücken in den Regelungen gibt, muß man nach Lösungen suchen. Dies war ein Weg das zu tun - es hätte auch andere gegeben. Aber wer von uns hätte in dieser Situation mit dem ICA Vorstand tauschen wollen? Ich in jedem Fall nicht! In jedem Fall gab es eine deutliche Mehrheit für die Einführung der neuen Regel und damit ein klares Statement der Klasse sich weiterhin modernen Entwicklungen anzupassen und technologisch immer auf dem Stand der Technik zu bleiben. Pragmatismus bleibt also weiter eine unserer Stärken, Bürokratie hingegen scheint wohl weiter nicht unser Ding zu sein ...

Andreas
GER-11