Regional realignment map A is flawed

[Sedalia Dave]

The option A map that SASS sent to the TGs has a serious flaw.

 

Math for the High Plains region under option A is way off. Only 881 not 2153. Only way to get 2153 is if CO and KS are moved to the High Plains Region.

 

Southwest Math is also incorrect as 4526 is only correct if CO and KS are not included in the Southwest Region.

 

So the question is did SASS intend for Colorado and Kansas to be in the High Plains region and the map colors are wrong?

 

OR

 

Did SASS intend for Kansas and Colorado to be in the Southwest region and the math is wrong?

 

Sent a PM to Misty yesterday but have not received a response.

[Boulder Canyon Bob# 32052L]

Misty acknowledged the math error in the HPR a couple of days ago. Not sure if anyone else caught the SW one.

[Sedalia Dave]

Misty acknowledged the math error in the HPR a couple of days ago. Not sure if anyone else caught the SW one.

That is why I wondered which region Kansas and Colorado were intended to be in.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

Can we see this map?

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

Can we see this map?

Look at the threads discussing the proposal. They have been posted numerous times.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

Look at the threads discussing the proposal. They have been posted numerous times.

 

Such as?

 

This is the first time I've seen in mentioned. I accept that it has been before, I have just not seen the threads. Looked over the first 2 pages of threads and didn't see any references to the maps. Have been overseas for a week, and didn't have much time to check the Wire.

 

I just think when you start a new thread and reference something, it's always a good idea to include a link to whatever it is you are referencing for the benefit of those who are unaware of the details of the discussion.

 

Maybe I'm not observant enough.

[Edward R S Canby, SASS#59971]

HKU: look here for the SASS proposals - http://www.sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=256167&hl=%2Bnew+%2Bsass+%2Bregional

Whiskey Kid made counter proposals here - http://www.sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=256241&hl=%2Bnew+%2Bsass+%2Bregional#entry3328898

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

 

Such as?

 

This is the first time I've seen in mentioned. I accept that it has been before, I have just not seen the threads. Looked over the first 2 pages of threads and didn't see any references to the maps. Have been overseas for a week, and didn't have much time to check the Wire.

 

I just think when you start a new thread and reference something, it's always a good idea to include a link to whatever it is you are referencing for the benefit of those who are unaware of the details of the discussion.

 

Maybe I'm not observant enough.

Right on page one. Been there quite a while.

 

http://www.sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=256241

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

Thanks guys. I found the maps.

http://www.sassnet.c...on OPTION A.pdf

http://www.sassnet.c...on OPTION B.pdf

All I can say is, that's a very generous definition of the "Northeast." You've got some southern states included in the region.

Anything south of the Mason Dixon line does not belong in the Northeast. For that matter, Pennsylvania and New Jersey are questionable at best. I suppose I could agree with those two being included, but not the rest of them.

To be honest, of the proposed "Northeast," everything outside of New England and New York, if you want to keep them together, could be considered the "Mid Atlantic" region.

Just my opinion. Take it with a grain of salt.

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

Go ahead. Try to be fair and equitable. Regardless of the efforts, it will not please everyone and there will be those who find fault and then whine about it.