Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217

PaleWolf Brunelle

Recommended Posts

Hello Folks,

 

In the past, when PWB gave a rule interpretation, even saying IMO, we would honor that as a rule interpretation. :)

 

From recent posts it seems some of you are no longer giving him that respect. Is my take correct? :unsure: Or, do you honor his opinions if you like them? :rolleyes:

 

Either way, I am finding recent trends appalling. All the "special" people with their "special" interpretations of long standing norms is getting out of hand. :ph34r:

 

Maybe, we should just set up targets and say "shooters' choice" of everything. Just engage each target at least once with any gun in any order from any window... You could be as creative as you like. No more arguments. No more need for interpretations. :rolleyes:

 

Madd Mike, I guess my new alias will be Madd Mo! Or, maybe it could be Allie "fun spoiler" Mo.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allie,

 

Perhaps stage writers sould simply use the English language. "Sweep the five targets left to right or right to left STARTING ON EITHER END" would be very specific.

 

Cheers,

BJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Folks,

 

In the past, when PWB gave a rule interpretation, even saying IMO, we would honor that as a rule interpretation. :)

 

From recent posts it seems some of you are no longer giving him that respect. Is my take correct? :unsure: Or, do you honor his opinions if you like them? :rolleyes:

 

Either way, I am finding recent trends appalling. All the "special" people with their "special" interpretations of long standing norms is getting out of hand. :ph34r:

 

Maybe, we should just set up targets and say "shooters' choice" of everything. Just engage each target at least once with any gun in any order from any window... You could be as creative as you like. No more arguments. No more need for interpretations. :rolleyes:

 

Madd Mike, I guess my new alias will be Madd Mo! Or, maybe it could be Allie "fun spoiler" Mo.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

 

 

Howdy Allie Mo,

+1 You are correct, I like a little creativity but the rules still need to be followed and stages should be written so the shooter and counters have no doubt on how it should be shot.

 

KK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like my thread from awhile ago about needless posts :lol:

 

...and no Ms. Mo, I don't feel your thread here is 'needless' - don't want my post to be misinterpreted...like some do with the rules :lol: .

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allie,

 

Perhaps stage writers sould simply use the English language. "Sweep the five targets left to right or right to left STARTING ON EITHER END" would be very specific.

 

Cheers,

BJT

Agreed!

 

However, the trend has been to brevity and some folks have taken that too far.

 

Gunner, what are you trying to say?

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allie Mo, I agree that PWB is the authority on rules. How can anyone think he is not. He always quotes the rule from either the handbook or RO handbook. He doesn't come off the wall with wild stuff like some folks do. Are you saying that folks want to bend the rules to their own liking and on top of that would be dishonest about equipment. Palewolf Brunelle will always be the one I would turn to on a question on how to play the game. Besides that he is a great pard and fun to shoot with. Not an ogre at all. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Folks,

 

In the past, when PWB gave a rule interpretation, even saying IMO, we would honor that as a rule interpretation. :)

 

From recent posts it seems some of you are no longer giving him that respect. Is my take correct? :unsure: Or, do you honor his opinions if you like them? :rolleyes:

 

Either way, I am finding recent trends appalling. All the "special" people with their "special" interpretations of long standing norms is getting out of hand. :ph34r:

 

Maybe, we should just set up targets and say "shooters' choice" of everything. Just engage each target at least once with any gun in any order from any window... You could be as creative as you like. No more arguments. No more need for interpretations. :rolleyes:

 

Madd Mike, I guess my new alias will be Madd Mo! Or, maybe it could be Allie "fun spoiler" Mo.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

 

Well - I guess if it was a real gun fight I'd get to shoot whatever target in whatever order I thought

appropriate, but I understand that this is just a game and people need rules to establish boundaries

and make comparisons. I respect that aspect of it.

 

I agree that people are sometimes disrespectful of PWB and each other at times, and sometimes pushing

a line of inquiry can be tedious to those who already have a position and are not amenable to change.

 

I've been on a posse with PWB a few times - he's a true gentleman, and I agree he's the most reliable

expert we have w/r/t the rules.

 

Yet not everyone feels that they must not challenge authority, especially if they do not know the

authority figure, or if that persons statements disagree with their own thinking.

 

New people are coming into the game, hopefully faster than others are leaving, or we're witnessing the

slow death of our game. Those folks will question authority, and tradition, because they can and are

taught to think for themselves, not to be Stepford wives. People who argue a cause from the position

of "It's always been that way" are doomed to extinction.

 

Change is inevitable: you either get in front of the rolling rocks and get run over, or you get beside

or behind and push the change in the direction you want it to go.

 

Just my view, but I've watched and participated in technological revolution in the work place, and I do

understand a little about human nature and organizational dynamics.

 

This game will be different in 20 years.

 

Shadow Catcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allie,

 

You are SO right. There are just too many folks who choose to read INTO rules to support their particular stance. Our "book" has to be read just the way it is written. We don't get to interpret.

 

AND ....... PWB is THE authority!!

 

Coffinmaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When PWB responds to a rules question, I read no further.

 

Whether I like it or not, the rule has been interpreted and the question answered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When PWB responds to a rules question, I read no further.

 

Whether I like it or not, the rule has been interpreted and the question answered.

 

Ditto!

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allie Mo, I agree that PWB is the authority on rules. How can anyone think he is not. He always quotes the rule from either the handbook or RO handbook. He doesn't come off the wall with wild stuff like some folks do. Are you saying that folks want to bend the rules to their own liking and on top of that would be dishonest about equipment. Palewolf Brunelle will always be the one I would turn to on a question on how to play the game. Besides that he is a great pard and fun to shoot with. Not an ogre at all. :)

Howdy Howdy (I love writing that),

 

Yes, I guess I am saying some "folks want to bend the rules to their own liking." When someone will not follow a PWB interpretation because he used IMO instead of quoting a "rule," I equate that to bending the rules. Heaven forbid, everything is in the rules. So, we frequently go to him for opinions. Relative to SASS, I see the following definition as applicable to his opinions, "the formal expression of a professional judgment." He interprets things for us when there is a question or controversy. Do we only listen when we like the answer? No, to be fair and ensure uniform calls for all shooters, we must rely on his professional interpretations/opinions.

 

FYI, I've disagreed with him. Yet, I must follow his interpretation at a match.

 

I'm not going to discuss dishonesty about equipment. Although, I have seen folks wearing illegal leather and wearing their leather illegally without being called on it.

 

:wub:

 

Allie Mo

 

PS Wish I could say I've shot with him...someday!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy Howdy (I love writing that),

 

Yes, I guess I am saying some "folks want to bend the rules to their own liking." When someone will not follow a PWB interpretation because he used IMO instead of quoting a "rule," I equate that to bending the rules. Heaven forbid, everything is in the rules. So, we frequently go to him for opinions. Relative to SASS, I see the following definition as applicable to his opinions, "the formal expression of a professional judgment." He interprets things for us when there is a question or controversy. Do we only listen when we like the answer? No, to be fair and ensure uniform calls for all shooters, we must rely on his professional interpretations/opinions.

 

FYI, I've disagreed with him. Yet, I must follow his interpretation at a match.

 

I'm not going to discuss dishonesty about equipment. Although, I have seen folks wearing illegal leather and wearing their leather illegally without being called on it.

 

:wub:

 

Allie Mo

 

PS Wish I could say I've shot with him...someday!

 

Illegal leather? Is that like Nuagahyde? :D

 

http://www.naugahyde.com/

 

Wearing leather illegally? Sounds rather kinky...:lol:

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks, the rules are the rules and PWB IS the authority. I have yet to see him make even a shady call.

 

In almost every case of a controversy the issue really resides with poorly written stage descriptions, which leaves shooters trying to make the best of a bad situation. Then the RO tends to make a call based on their interpretation of the directions. Starting with bad info leads to bad calls and confusion.

 

How about folks just having their stages editted before a shoot???

 

Ol' #4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW!!!

I disagree, is that still allowed here!!

Rules are "the rule" and opinions are opinion, no matter who gives them.

It's not about me or you, we don't give Ps to our selves.

Ps are given when someone breaks "the rule", so there must be a rule to break.

When the man himself says "no it's not a rule, it's my opinion" how can we penalize someone for breaking a rule that does not exist?

Because it's not the norm????

Here in Florida we get folks from all over the country every winter,should we penalize them because their norm is different than ours?

When you expect everyone to honor your norm, aren't you "bending the rules to YOUR own liking".

I generally agree with PWB, but I for one will not penalize a shooter for his opinion!!

If you want it to be a rule, write in the book "for everyone to see".

If you want it shot a certain way...write it in the scenario.

I love folks who do the norm, I drive past them, as they sit in that long line, right to that open toll booth with the flashing green-light...And I appreciate it!!!

 

BH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Allie Mo and the fire.

Not sure what started the conversation but here is my .02

It sure seems like a lot of folks have begun to read into the rules interpretations that they like, rather than trying to understand what the rule actually says. I think this is a reflection of our society in general where everyone is a "lawyer" who has the "right" to do as they please and then argue that the law (rules) allows it. This path eventually leads to anarchy as my interpretation of the law (rules) may differ from yours, but if I follow the example of society I have the "right" to do as I please regardless of the law (rules).

 

This moral relativity is in direct contadiction of what SASS has so eloquently stated:

"It is the intention and hope of SASS these requirements will serve to preserve and protect Cowboy Action

Shooting™ from the gimmickry and technical gamesmanship that have had such a negative effect on other shooting disciplines." SHB pg 1

Further -

"You do not look for ways to create an advantage out of what is or is not stated as a rule or shooting procedure." SHB pg 2

 

I have only met PWB once but his knowlege of the handbooks is incredible. His experience in handling various situations that have come up is vast. He is a gentleman who took the time to share his wisdom with someone who had a lot of "that's how we do it around here" knowlege but not nearly enough "book" learning. Thank You PWB!! When people say that change is inevitable or that if we don't get out of the way of falling rocks - they may be right but I for one see no reason to change a system that works a lot more than it fails just because someone doesn't like the outcome when they "challenged authority"

 

Regards

 

 

:FlagAm:

Gateway Kid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW!!!

I disagree, is that still allowed here!!

Rules are "the rule" and opinions are opinion, no matter who gives them.

It's not about me or you, we don't give Ps to our selves.

Ps are given when someone breaks "the rule", so there must be a rule to break.

When the man himself says "no it's not a rule, it's my opinion" how can we penalize someone for breaking a rule that does not exist?

Because it's not the norm????

Here in Florida we get folks from all over the country every winter,should we penalize them because their norm is different than ours?

When you expect everyone to honor your norm, aren't you "bending the rules to YOUR own liking".

I generally agree with PWB, but I for one will not penalize a shooter for his opinion!!

If you want it to be a rule, write in the book "for everyone to see".

If you want it shot a certain way...write it in the scenario.

I love folks who do the norm, I drive past them, as they sit in that long line, right to that open toll booth with the flashing green-light...And I appreciate it!!!

 

BH

BH,

 

It sounds like you believe the things you disagree with that PWB has interpreted for us do not need to be heeded as they are not in the rule book. :unsure: Well I disagree and you disagree with me. Guess we agree to disagree, HUH?

 

I am not asking folks to honor my norm. I am asking them to honor The RO Committee's interpretations.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When PWB responds to a rules question, I read no further.

 

Whether I like it or not, the rule has been interpreted and the question answered.

Yep!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of you who decide to argue with PaleWolf, I thought I'd let ya know he shot me in the right sideburn last Sunday, drew blood and everything!

Thank God he hit me in the hardest part of my body with loads that probably didn't make the power factor.

Don't argue with Da Wolf, ya gets Da Fangs ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kid Sopris, Regulator, #3290

This awareness of SASS Evolution is not new...The SASS Wire makes it instant. The bottom line boils down to integrity; Doing the right thing when nobody is watching.

 

Having respect for those principles that bind activities under a common umbrella.

 

PWB and others, have given countless hours of dedication of personal time to this sport; At least show respect for those efforts, even if you personally disagree with the Valued and Educated opinions/interpretations expressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW!!!

I disagree, is that still allowed here!!

Rules are "the rule" and opinions are opinion, no matter who gives them.

It's not about me or you, we don't give Ps to our selves.

Ps are given when someone breaks "the rule", so there must be a rule to break.

When the man himself says "no it's not a rule, it's my opinion" how can we penalize someone for breaking a rule that does not exist?

Because it's not the norm????

Here in Florida we get folks from all over the country every winter,should we penalize them because their norm is different than ours?

When you expect everyone to honor your norm, aren't you "bending the rules to YOUR own liking".

I generally agree with PWB, but I for one will not penalize a shooter for his opinion!!

If you want it to be a rule, write in the book "for everyone to see".

If you want it shot a certain way...write it in the scenario.

I love folks who do the norm, I drive past them, as they sit in that long line, right to that open toll booth with the flashing green-light...And I appreciate it!!!

 

BH

BH,

I really don't know why you have a B in your bonnet over this deal.......The reality is that if YOU are the Match Director then you are right and if I'm the Match Director then I'm right as far as "the sweep" goes....because there ain't a written rule either way.

 

As to Mrs. Allie's concern over giving PWB all due respect.....absolutely we should......but no one is perfect....so it should be ok to question a ruling. Once explained and then understood....move on.

 

BH has every right in the world to disagree about "the sweep"......

 

Stan

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tennessee Stud, SASS# 43634 Life

When PWB talks 'bout the rules... there's nothin' left to be said.

 

BTW... NObody in SASS has as gooda taste in blades as the PWB...

 

ts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the supreme court of these United States hands down a decision it is an "OPINION OF THE COURT"

 

When PWB gives his opinion on SASS rules and procedures that's good enough for me. Only exception would be if his remarks are followed by "but I was overruled by the RO Rules committee"

 

As always, local clubs and match directors can make exceptions or whatever, and if I'm playing on their range or match, I'll play by their rules.

 

Grizz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allie,

 

Perhaps stage writers sould simply use the English language. "Sweep the five targets left to right or right to left STARTING ON EITHER END" would be very specific.

 

Cheers,

BJT

 

with all due respect to the english language

blaming stage writers 99.9% of the time is not totally correct

 

we have right brained folks

we have left brained folks

we have :blink: less or more :blink: brained folks

 

yer specific idea,,,,,, I like

dont git me wrong

 

but how specific

.....................does the stage writer have to say no double taps, when his stage says no triple taps?

that is a recent example of

how folks can think

 

wearing a hat? in costume categories

iz a hat, on stampede string over ones back count, does the stage writer have ta be that specific?

 

BJT, I agree stage writting is most of it

folks looking for something that aint there is a lot of the problems

 

I will see you and the kid at eot soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BH,

I really don't know why you have a B in your bonnet over this deal.......The reality is that if YOU are the Match Director then you are right and if I'm the Match Director then I'm right as far as "the sweep" goes....because there ain't a written rule either way.

 

As to Mrs. Allie's concern over giving PWB all due respect.....absolutely we should......but no one is perfect....so it should be ok to question a ruling. Once explained and then understood....move on.

 

BH has every right in the world to disagree about "the sweep"......

 

Stan

That is the exact reason, the rule and penalization there of, should be the same no matter who the Match director is!!

It's just like on one posse you get a P and on the other posse you don't!!

Or Our favorite saying "if you think it's a miss, it's a hit", well "if you think it's a P, it's not".

That's why we go by written rules or written stages not opinions!!!!!!!!!!

On the "sweep thread" half the people agree and half disagree, right there disallows the P under our "rule" doubt goes to the shooter.

As far as PWB goes his opinion is highly experienced and therefore respected, but he is part of the rules committee, not "the rules committee".

Until he announces "this is the way it is", "that's the rule', it's not a rule it's an opinion!!...He himself said it was not a rule!! Don't y'all believe him????

So I will keep the "P" in my bonnet until someone breaks a RULE and then I'll give it to them.

 

BH ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why we go by written rules or written stages not opinions!!!!!!!!!!

 

Sure wish some in power would take that same attitude when dealing with our Constitution...

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...

As far as PWB goes his opinion is highly experienced and therefore respected, but he is part of the rules committee, not "the rules committee"...

 

Hey BH,

 

I guess you didn't get the memo. :unsure:;) PWB is the RO Committee Spokesman for the SASS Wire. If you don't want to take my word on that, contact Hipshot (sorry Hipshot) at the SASS office and ask his opinion on that.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey BH,

 

I guess you didn't get the memo. :unsure:;) PWB is the RO Committee Spokesman for the SASS Wire. If you don't want to take my word on that, contact Hipshot (sorry Hipshot) at the SASS office and ask his opinion on that.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

 

I still want to know about this 'illegal leather' thing.....

 

Allie Mo - you have your fingers in your ears and saying 'neeener neeener' at me? :D Have ya lost your humor ma'am? Oh the humanity!

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When PWB responds to a rules question, I read no further.

 

Whether I like it or not, the rule has been interpreted and the question answered.

Yep, PWB is da man, I'm gald he takes the time to stop in and help us. Good Luck :)

 

 

Jefro :ph34r: Relax-Enjoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep!

 

Yep! +2

 

The Ghosts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still want to know about this 'illegal leather' thing.....

 

Allie Mo - you have your fingers in your ears and saying 'neeener neeener' at me? :D Have ya lost your humor ma'am? Oh the humanity!

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

NO! I have my fingers in my ears saying, "lalalala!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't normally mix it up in this type of foolishness, but I'm going to just to ask a question.

 

You see, I don't understand the major problem. If you take a case to court, you get a ruling/judgment. This may be done by a judge or by a group of 12 folks that ain't smart enough to get out of jury duty.....but you get your outcome. You don't like it?, then you get to appeal it....sometimes a couple of times. In the end, you get a ruling that can no longer be appealed. Here, PWB is the guy who speaks for the committee, so you get your final decision without going through all of that other stuff. Just like the legal case in court, you may not like or agree with the decision, but there it is. It is what it is. I don't get the heartburn with that, but then I was always a bit on the slow side.

 

But that takes me to the the thing that I really don't understand. Real life story here as an example: Shooting with my posse and my 13 y/o is shooting with us. She's gabbing in the back while the scenario is read and not paying attention like she should. Scenario reads (and forgive me if I don't have this exactly as it was written....I've slept since then) "with rifle conduct a reverse progressive sweep of R4-R3-R2-R1, farthest to nearest" make rifle safe blah blah blah and do the same with pistols. I scratch my head and ask, "Does that mean I'm supposed to shoot 4 on R4, then 3 on R3, etc.?" I get a reply of "No, you shoot 1 on R4, 2 on R3, 3 on R2 and 4 on R1" (with R4 being the furthest away and to the right of the others). "Ok, got it."

 

Daughter strolls up, shoots 4 on R4, 3 on R3, 2 on R2, and 1 on R1. In fact, it was a really good run (for her) and she repeated it on the pistols. She shot the second or third round on R4 before the RO, counters or me could say anything, so we all shut up and let her finish rather than risk making it worse. She's grinning ear to ear to hear a low stage time, clean, and then her face drops when they announce, "with a P." :o She says, "but that's not the way I understood it" and I chime in and say "Did you hear me ask the question?" "No."

 

I say all of this for this reason -- if you don't fully understand what the course of fire is supposed to be, why do you load up and say "Shooter ready?" Asking seems pretty easy to me, but I've already said that I tend to be on the slow side. :wacko: Heck, I've shot some of those "open ended" stages where "you must shoot each target twice with your choice of weapon, but no double taps" (or stuff to that effect), and I've literally asked, "So if I shoot this one, then this one, then...blah, blah, blah, is that right?" If they say "Yep," then I go about my business of trying to do just that. I think just asking the question, more times than not, would fix the problem, but....... :blink:

 

Ok, I'll go sit in the corner and shut up again..... :)

 

Chick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey BH,

 

I guess you didn't get the memo. :unsure:;) PWB is the RO Committee Spokesman for the SASS Wire. If you don't want to take my word on that, contact Hipshot (sorry Hipshot) at the SASS office and ask his opinion on that.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

Is that all he is, Dang I thought he was Supreme Court Justice, or a Rock Star.

But if that's all he is, doesn't he have to speak to the RO committee before he can speak for them!!!

To quote PWB "It's not a rule, It's my opinion. That's why I put IMOs in several places".

Or something like that!! What part of that don't you understand!!

How do I get on the memo list, I am a "special person"...Oh I'm sorry, is that condescending??

Even a Supreme Court Justice has to get a majority before he can say "That's the rule".

 

BH :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO! I have my fingers in my ears saying, "lalalala!"

 

Ah - now I understand the problem :rolleyes:

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh heaven help me...

 

Here's a very likely scenario (and I've seen it happen). New shooter shoota a stage, misses a bunch, and deserves an UNQUESTIONED P. TO says, I'm gonna let shooter just take the misses. Am I a HA for thinking that is not right. Beeellleeive me I had ooodles of misses and many Ps when I started. It never ruined my enthusiasm for shooting.

 

When did this disregard for rules start? Is it a good thing?

 

It is fine for a top shooter to say, let the poor smuck go. :rolleyes: We're just having fun here. :rolleyes: What about the poor smuck who would have finished second to last had the correct call been made.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that all he is, Dang I thought he was Supreme Court Justice, or a Rock Star.

But if that's all he is, doesn't he have to speak to the RO committee before he can speak for them!!!

To quote PWB "It's not a rule, It's my opinion. That's why I put IMOs in several places".

Or something like that!! What part of that don't you understand!!

How do I get on the memo list, I am a "special person"...Oh I'm sorry, is that condescending??

Even a Supreme Court Justice has to get a majority before he can say "That's the rule".

 

BH :P

BH,

 

How do you know he does not contact them? I have seen him take days before replying and he has even posted that he needs to confer with the ROC. They selected him. They are, IMO, confident enough in him to let him be the judge of when he can state an "opinion" and when he must obtain a "collaborative opinion."

 

So, you don't understand that the "memo" comment was a joke. Heaven help you!

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.