Originally Posted by Manifold

Please elaborate.

Originally Posted by Manifold

Please elaborate.

Originally Posted by Manifold

These problems in PCA and other such social clubs have always been there and will always be there. There's no point yelling at the clouds about it. If someone wants to participate in club activities, it's best to associate with agreeable people, avoid associating with disagreeable people, and not pick fights one can't win. Luigi could have resolved this in his favor by simply biting his tongue when he was disrespected and providing the data. Instead, he escalated a small skirmish with one person into a war with the leadership of an organization, and he lost the war. The organization suffered some damage also, but Luigi gained nothing from inflicting that damage except perhaps some feeling of justice.

Originally Posted by needmoregarage

@dgrobs I completely understand why you approached your situation in the way that you did. And you got the outcome you wanted. Congrats on that. It was your situation and your choice.

But for me…it falls slightly short of “win-win”. Nothing at NNJR has changed (that you know of). The person who disrespected you may continue to do that to other people in the future (and likely will as people don’t tend to change without a lot of reason, and even then…change is tough).

Todd was trying to make a positive change in the organization that would benefit everyone. And he did so knowing that he might end up sacrificing something he loved and received personal joy from. Yes…he cut of his nose to spite his face, but he did so because he refused to tolerate being disrespected and treated in an unfair manner. And he did so (as I interpret) to improve the overall organization, and to stand up for what he believed was right.

Todd lost and PCA “won”. But PCA will continue forward in the very same way that caused them to lose Todd, and now others. And NNJR will continue forward doing the same thing to people, and not everyone will respond the way you did.

And frankly, WHY should you allow someone to treat you disrespectfully, for absolutely no reason? I understand what you wrote, but I could not take that same path. If people don’t stand up to mistreatment, then nothing changes.

Lastly, Todd gave PCA AMPLE time to respond before going public. He states that the issue started on Feb. 27. His first post is dated April 5. Why does that not “count”? Many are critical of Todd’s actions by making it public. Why isn’t anyone critical of PCA for being unable to provide answers in a reasonable period of time? (demonstrated by the weeks of time Todd gave them before going public).

It seems to me PCA was given a fair amount of grace which they squandered.

Originally Posted by multi21

Todd’s not all that smart.

Originally Posted by jdistefa

Best post so far.

Originally Posted by multi21

Because this wasn’t Todd’s first day at PCA CR and certainly not a wall flower, but an active participant in varying aspects of HIS club. What changed was a not well thought out ruling that he challenged. When the powers that be didn’t like that he exposed it publicly, they decided to punish him for it. Todd was told to just walk away and race elsewhere by many, but Todd’s not all that smart (no offense intended) and his lawyering got in the way.

I love the bottom line, and this entire episode’s bottom line will result in people being less upfront with their medical conditions which is in direct contradiction to what’s supposed to be the desired result. Congratulations, you win the battle but lost the war.

Originally Posted by Manifold

We have no real medical clearance required for DE, despite street cars being driven very fast by relatively inexperienced drivers with passengers (instructors) in the right seat, and no evidence that medical issues are a significant factor in DE crashes.

Originally Posted by ProCoach

How do you know that?

Originally Posted by ProCoach

How do you know that?

Originally Posted by Manifold

It's also common sense. If people have health issues which would impair their ability to drive on track, they'll likely not try to drive on track.

Driving on track is a totally voluntary high-intensity activity, and people generally won't do it if they don't feel up to it.

Originally Posted by stownsen914

I can offhand think of three significant medical incidents that came up for three different drivers on track. Two resulted in significant crashes (in the third the driver was able to safely pull off to await assistance). I'd imagine there are more such incidents.

Originally Posted by Manifold

Of course there will be some crashes where health issues were a contributing factor. But in what percentage of crashes were health issues a contributing factor? And what effect does or would medical screening have in preventing those crashes? We shouldn’t be expending resources in doing screening if there’s no evidence of a safety benefit.

Bigger concern in my mind is drivers who slept poorly, dehydrated, tired from being in the car too long, worn down from heat, etc. Screening won’t address that.

Originally Posted by Manifold

Of course there will be some crashes where health issues were a contributing factor. But in what percentage of crashes were health issues a contributing factor? And what effect does or would medical screening have in preventing those crashes? We shouldn’t be expending resources in doing screening if there’s no evidence of a safety benefit.

Bigger concern in my mind is drivers who slept poorly, dehydrated, tired from being in the car too long, worn down from heat, etc. Screening won’t address that.