Home Current News News Archive Shop/Advertise Ridecamp Classified Events Learn/AERC
Endurance.Net Home Ridecamp Archives
ridecamp@endurance.net
[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]

Re: [RC] ROC MisInformation Again - Barbara McCrary

Kathy, thanks for bringing this up, and now that you have, I DO remember that the cancellation of ROC that year was due to a requested date change that could not be met.  Too bad the RM didn't go ahead and request a date for the following year.  As a sanctioning director with many years' experience, it was my duty to try to avoid having more than one ride of the same length on the same day within the same region.  Hundred-mile RMs wanted at least 3 weeks between 100-milers.  It was tough sometimes, because of ride site restrictions (on public lands) and other considerations.
 
Barbara
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 9:16 AM
Subject: [RC] ROC MisInformation Again

Tom writes:
 
> "The recent SW sanctioning discussion is not new,
> even tho no one has mentioned names, there is no ROC because of it."
 
The fact remains, the ROC *was* AERC sanctioned... for the originally
requested June date.  It was only after the requesting person found
out they had procrastinated too long and could not also CEI /FEI
sanctioning did they request a move to October.  The October date
requested landed square on top of another already sanctioned 100 mile
ride.  But no other date was good enough for the requesting RM.
 
What is up?  Don't people remember this?  There was a huge discussion
about it on RC.  It's all in the archives.
 
OK, here's one for you.  If *you* were the sanctioning director and a
RM requested a date that already had a sanctioned ride what would
you do?  What if it wasn't the ROC?  Would the decision be different?
 
Are there rides and ride managers out there that don't have to follow
normal AERC sanctioning rules? 
 
Kathy Myers
in Santa Fe, NM

Replies
[RC] ROC MisInformation Again, Magnumsmom