[Rob Hood]

Not sure who the letter writer is pointing a finger at, but he's definitely pointing a finger...perhaps at NASA?

[sgarnett]

Sean paraphrased the letter pretty well, but I'll add a bit more - the guy (Scott Giles, of the SCCA Atlanta region) described some issues he had with how some events were conducted. Only one corner worker was being used at a corner, and the guy was asleep. When Scott reported this after the race, whoever he reported it to didn't think it was that big of a deal, but according to Scott, this was not a one-time occurence.

Scott went on to say that he saw "multiple races" staffed at levels under what the SCCA requires in order to throw the green flag. He was also critical of how drivers received their license, compared to other sanctioning bodies. One could probably argue the staffing and licensing requirements comparison until blue in the face, but since he didn't fully describe the situation, it can't be fully discussed.

He also stated that while rule changing in the SCCA was slow and bureaucratic (my words), the other sanctioning body would simply change a rule because ONE person decided to change the rule.

But hey, he got a free pair of Piloti shoes for being the "most eloquent" letter of the month. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I missed the free shoes detail. Personally, I thought the "keep stock stock" letter was more interesting.

OK, I guess I have to add the letters to the short list of stuff I read in the mag (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)