PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 I did say "Posters". This aint my first slide down the massive series of tubes known as the innerwebs. Once the results are published, I'll rely on you to compile the comments & figure out the percentage of approval. I don't do numbers...didn't play the odds when I was betting on the dogs, either. (racing, not fighting)
Ramblin Gambler Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 I'm gunna need an official title for something like that.
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 I'm gunna need an official title for something like that. How about "bookie"...we might come out ahead if we play this right (and I happen to have "insider info" that might sway things in the right direction). ...although that may have been a poor phrase to utilize in this case...
Wyatt Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 Hey.......Widder if you want to increase the number of viewers just post a video of the Geisha Twins ..........until then this will have to do
Widder, SASS #59054 Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 Wyatt, about 2 years back, Lady T posted a pix of RRR, me and one of the Geisha Twins eating at a resturant in NC. It is a REAL TRUE to life picture but some of the pards thought it was photoshop. Next time, I'll be sure to have multiple pix taken. ..........Widder
Rye Miles #13621 Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 The only thing that made any sense was the first one statement by Misty Moonshine. Guys ya shoulda stopped there!!! pretty much 7 pages of Bull$%#@!!!!! Rye
Cowboy Rick, SASS #49739L Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 It's in the SASS by-laws that 73.8% of the Wire responses to any WB proposed change must be positive in order for the change to be implemented. Cheers! Phantom 83.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot CR
Widder, SASS #59054 Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 Although I can't prove it, statistics and percentages mean nothing because history repeats itself. ..........Widder
Wyatt Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 Widder You expect me to believe that story, sure ...........and my wife is 4'9"
Smoken D Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 83.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot CR Yea, but 98.3% of internet readers believe it.
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 are we there yet? some must really be dug in!!
Grizzly Dave Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 Dealing with a group of volunteers, people who have jobs, real lives, and other obligations, it's gonna take some time.
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 gee, I wudn't know about that at all...... the mods declaration makes this look like a pure cakewalk,,,,
Grizzly Dave Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 gee, I wudn't know about that at all...... the mods declaration makes this look like a pure cakewalk,,,, CC, wasn't trying to poke at cha, just reminding us all, especially me that these things take time.
Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 Posted June 18, 2014 Posted June 18, 2014 Zoinks, Brother King. Did Velma drop her glasses again?
Brother King, SASS #69031 Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx98pskffOY
Gawd Awful Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 Actually, I think the edits reflect the intent of those that made the edits not the intent of those that voted for the rule. The old pre-summit rule was clear and unambiguous. The rule voted for at the summit and implemented after the summit was clear and unambiguous. Now that we have injected the notions of "intentional" or "accidental" we have a rule full of ambiguities and very difficult to apply. Let's just shelve the new rule and go back to the rule as it existed pre-summit. That would address the concerns of the WB and still leave us with a clear and unambiguous rule. I am not a fan of going back to the "old rule" at all, however I do agree that it was clear and easy to understand, therefor it would be better than this "modifed" new rule that (so far) is open to interpatation, and apparently requires Jedi mind reading skills to detirmine shooters intent No matter what people "think" the intent of the TG vote was, the wording is VERY clear. In my opinion, disregarding the vote and "modafing" the rule at will undermines the hard work of th TGs, the TG structure, and the will of the membership/CUSTOMERS. Either do away with the whole TG process and force whatever rules you see fit on us, or accept the your CUSTOMERS voted in a way that you didn't expect, allow the CISTOMERS to have what they want.
Kid Drover Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 I agree the wording and the intent of the "re-written" is clear. However, it is impossible to accomplish on a consistent basis across the globe. The TO has to (in a split second) determine if the long gun was closed intentionally or by accident, and, decide to call the shooter back or not. Some TO's will call shooters back, some will not. Some beleive no one would ever close a long on purpose, some would make the mistake, and call the shooter back even though the gun closed by accident. There is no consistency. So, IMHO, the fairness factor is jeporardized. In fact, I would be in favor of limiting the TO's ability to call the shooter back, period. I have seen some shooters in the same match, heck, the stage, get called back, and other shooters got the MSV because the TO didn't notice the gun closed. KCD
Assassin Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 We can just start the shooter from position one, without any coaching allow the shooter to complete the scenario. Then the TO assumes zero responsibility. Have specific instructions at each shooting position, shooter is responsible for his/her own actions. TO can follow close enough in order to keep shooter safe and catch last shot on the clock. You ever try to time Cobra Cat? Shooters need to know the rules and follow the scenario instructions. Only way to have every shooter have a consistant TO. Assassin
JudgeBagodonuts Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 This reminds me of the homeowner's association requiring owners to carry their dogs from the parking lot to the building in order to prevent dog doo-doo on the grass. Yes, it serves the purpose, but is totally overkill to just saying that anyone with a pet is responsible for cleaning up their dog's mess. Why don't we just ban vertical staging and go back to the old rule that says long guns must be open and empty? Or, if we're going to have vertical, require it to be drop barrels with a pad at the bottom (barrel in first)? JB
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 or have actions that won't close when you set them down vertically.... vertical staging and restaging was never a problem with rifles before extra light springs came along..... shotguns yes, sxs that is, but then it was your choice to shoot them,,,
Cowboy Rick, SASS #49739L Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 or have actions that won't close when you set them down vertically.... vertical staging and restaging was never a problem with rifles before extra light springs came along..... shotguns yes, sxs that is, but then it was your choice to shoot them,,, Hard turn ahead for this thread, please fasten your seat belts and stow ... CC - I know you don't want to go back to the "all stock innards" discussion??? CR
Brother King, SASS #69031 Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 or have actions that won't close when you set them down vertically.... vertical staging and restaging was never a problem with rifles before extra light springs came along..... shotguns yes, sxs that is, but then it was your choice to shoot them,,, Shay-annie....look up on the top right of your keyboard. Do you see that "DELETE" button? I find it useful just before I post something truly stupid to go ahead and use it. I'm constantly amazed by how often it serves me. Maybe you'll find that it serves you well, too. Vertical staging isn't used in USPSA, 3 Gun and has devolved out of SASS for a darn good reason: It's unsafe, breaks parts, causes penalties and it's virtually impossible to stage or re-stage a SxS. '97's should never have been adopted for SASS use....a topic of another thread I'm sure. Those of us in Classic Cowboy do appreciate the efforts of the Union of Prairie Pimps local Ohio 1 to use whatever contraption, battery operated or manual to get their kicks. We would never condemn that lifestyle as anything wrong as we're a tolerant bunch of cowboys.
Rye Miles #13621 Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 83.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot CR Including this too??
Cowboy Rick, SASS #49739L Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 Including this too?? There is a 92% possibility of that
Widder, SASS #59054 Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 Shay-annie....look up on the top right of your keyboard. Do you see that "DELETE" button? I find it useful just before I post something truly stupid to go ahead and use it. I'm constantly amazed by how often it serves me. Maybe you'll find that it serves you well, too. Vertical staging isn't used in USPSA, 3 Gun and has devolved out of SASS for a darn good reason: It's unsafe, breaks parts, causes penalties and it's virtually impossible to stage or re-stage a SxS. '97's should never have been adopted for SASS use....a topic of another thread I'm sure. Those of us in Classic Cowboy do appreciate the efforts of the Union of Prairie Pimps local Ohio 1 to use whatever contraption, battery operated or manual to get their kicks. We would never condemn that lifestyle as anything wrong as we're a tolerant bunch of cowboys. Thats funny Bro King. I was just sitting here thinkin that them Prairie Pimps are just a couple calibers away from being a Classic Cowboy..... sorri, I couldn't resist. ...........Widder
Brother King, SASS #69031 Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 Thats funny Bro King. I was just sitting here thinkin that them Prairie Pimps are just a couple calibers away from being a Classic Cowboy..... sorri, I couldn't resist. ...........Widder A couple of calibers and one or two chromosomes?
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 if we weren't leaving for the docs in a few minutes, Ide have the hart to joust wit chu,,,
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.