In article <k1Dc9.269932$me6.34698@sccrnsc01>, "Tom Pabst" <tmpa...@attbi.com>
writes:
>Here we go again".....is directed right back at you! Why do you seem so
>"thin skinned" about this RASCAR stuff? I wonder?
>"Hypocrisy"....has a few definitions....the most common is something like
>this (according to my dictionary): "When actions are in conflict with
>principles or words."
>This is not a cuss word (at least not that I know of.....not in this country
>at least). Its not particularly negative even....except that one would have
>a difficult time accomplishing much in life if their actions were always in
>conflict with their words. I've used the word properly to describe what I
>perceive as a conflict between what seems to be your (collective) goals for
>RASCAR races, and the special rules you've implemented to conduct the races.
>Did I say, "Your mother's ugly and your sister's a hooker." Or something
>similar? Sorry, I didn't mean to! ....lol....
Hypocrisy to me means fake or false, even dishonest, if you stretch. Yes, I
take offense to being called that, or having it implied towards something I'm
involved with.
>Whether you want to win isn't even questioned. The fact that RASCAR doesn't
>collect season points means the outcome of the races are for fun....and the
>personal fulfillment of the participants....what ever their personal goals
>with sim racing may be (which could be to win, to gain experience, get a
>top-10 finish...or a dozen others). I sim race because I like racing. I
>win less than 5% of the time, does this mean I don't have fun for 95% of the
>rest of the races? I don't really even understand the point you are trying
>to make about that......it totally escapes me.
The point is that you are trying for a win every race. That's what makes it
fun. Dismissing the value/feeling of victory just because we don't track
points isn't right, IMO.
> "I also know of *points* leagues that have a 'no racing back to yellow'
>rule (also in an attempt to avoid more incidents). Would you call
> them hypocritical as well?"
><Pabst> Yes. If the league's charter was to provide a realistic racing
>environment for newbies. And, they held "mixed races" with experienced
>drivers and newbies running together. And, were attempting to reduce
>"incidents during cautions"......that would be in conflict with the "no
>racing back" rule implementation - in my experience and opinion. Whether
>they collect points or not....doesn't even matter to the point.
Trying to reduce incidents under caution is a hypocritical or bad thing?
>"I disagree with your opinion. Hell, if we ran with no damage, I'd probably
>finish a LOT higher. I wouldn't be as worried about damaging my car, or
>taking someone else out of the race by forcing a pass. I could bounce off
>the walls(or other cars) without any concerns."
><Pabst> Okay...now here we have a basic and fundamental difference of
>opinion about the "spirit" of competition and racing. Do you think a
>Winston Cup driver pulls out onto the race track every Sunday and says,
>"Okay, today I don't want to die or wreck my car....so, because that's
>possible, I'm not going to make any mistakes or do anything stupid. I
>certainly am not going to try to win, or to pass anyone, either!" So
>Eldred....since you know wrecks happen in real racing, mistakes made by
>veteran drivers......and they can die and their wrecks cost real
>money...........but even with all that, there's no real deterrent to making
>racing mistakes - Are you trying to tell me that having "damage turned on"
>in a racing sim is more of a deterrent to "dumbness" than dying in a real
>race car is?
> Of course you are not!
That's a strawman argument. Totally ridiculous.
>"Again, I object to you're calling our attempts at better racing "bicycle
>training wheel" rules.
><Pabst> Eldred.....When I see a duck. I call it a "duck." Whether you
>like the term I use or not, I'm being honest and calling it as I see it.
>Any rule you introduce outside of the normal NASCAR racing rules.....that
>you think will reduce mistakes made by rookies......just won't. These are
>"training wheel" rules and they don't work. So, have a fit if you want
>to.....but I think you are not addressing the topic when you take it
>personal like this.
That's funny - I thought I *have* been addressing the topic. We have a lot of
cautions. We also have a lot of incidents under caution. We're trying to
reduce BOTH. I see that as VERY on topic, and worth doing everything in our
power to do so. According to your logic, running 'no damage' or allowing
restarts would be "training wheel" rules too, but you've done both in your
races.
>"Honestly, I don't know what the hell else to DO! What would you suggest?"
><Pabst> I have been making those "suggestions" in the form of constructive
>criticism for several weeks, maybe a couple months now. What's your point?
>"We can't FORCE everyone to practice 30-60 hours for each race."
><Pabst> When did I suggest that "forcing" people to practice was essential
>to having a successful RASCAR series of races? I've only mentioned the
>topic when others, including yourself, have questioned how much practice is
>necessary to properly prepare for a serious sim race......how much do
>"veteran sim drivers" practice for their league races. What "signal" are
>you trying to send to the newbies? That they don't have to practice at all?
>Certainly, you can't be saying that. Are you saying you can invent
>"training wheel rules" that will replace experience, practice and
>preparation? I hope not.
And it's impossible for the average person to practice 30-60 hours for weekly
races. You simply don't have enough time. Most people would be hard pressed
to even get that much practice for a MONTHLY race. Only kids on summer
vacation have that kind of time to spend.
>"We don't kick people out just because they may not have perfect car
>control."
><Pabst> When did I suggest that, too? What I asked about was the
>possibility of having a second, "veterans only" RASCAR race on Saturday.
>Why is that interpreted by you as "kicking people out" of the open RASCAR
>race?
The argument here was that kicking out the inexperienced or simply less-skilled
drivers should reduce the number(and/or severity) of the cautions we currently
have. I wasn't even TALKING about a "veterans only" race...
But since you brought it up, how would you determine a participation list for
that again? Also, what rules would that race be run under?
>"Faced with those two very important facts, I really don't see how to
>eliminate yellow flags."
><Pabst> Now you got it! You can't "eliminate" yellow flags or accidents,
>or whatever......made as the result of rookie mistakes. You also can't even
>reduce them. Not with special rules or race procedures. You CAN do two
>things:
>1. You can help to reduce incidents during RASCAR races due to newbies'
>mistakes.......by encourage them to practice and prepare for the races.
>But, that's all you can do....is "encourage" because as long as you allow
>anyone to enter the RASCAR races, with no "culpability" as to their
>background or online racing experience........you will always have wrecks
>and yellows due to rookie mistakes. You can not legislate them away with
>special rules!
>2. You can "minimize the effect" on the other drivers.....from these
>mistakes/wrecks, etc., but you can't eliminate the mistakes/wrecks
>themselves. If you can't eliminate them (or even significantly reduce
>them), then why isn't minimizing their effect.....the next best step to
>take?
So should we be running under "no damage", "no yellow flag" conditions? That
would certainly minimize the effect of the crash, except everyone involved is
now way behind.
>Eldred....I want to close this post by telling you what I think about what
>you are trying to do with this RASCAR series on Saturday:
>1. I think its fantastic. I've been coming to r.a.s. for about 5 years or
>more....and no one, except you has tried to do this. I have "thanked you"
>many times for doing it....I'm thanking you again, right now.
>2. I do think you are not having fun doing this. Why? Well, maybe because
>you are trying to take on the whole "responsibility" yourself of seeing that
>the RASCAR races are successful and accomplish the goals you and others have
>suggested for them. I also think you should get some assistance in running
>the "servers" you have so graciously provided, so that burden is not on your
>shoulders every weekend. If you can't do that, perhaps cutting the RASCAR
>races to every other weekend or something, could reduce this burden on you?
>3. Ultimately, if you are not personally having fun doing this.....it won't
>continue. So, I ask you to tell us....everyone who has run in a RASCAR
>race, everyone who may run in one in the future.....what it is that we
>(collectively) can do.....to make this more fun for you. I want you to
>continue.......I'm pretty sure that is not an isolated desire....lol....
>So.....what is it we can do to make this more fun for you?
Running the server, in itself, is not a burden at all. It takes maybe 5
minutes to set it up. It's a 'fire and forget' type of thing thanks to John's
DeMONS2 program, and I don't even have to be there for it to start. It takes
maybe 15-20 minutes after the race to zip the replay, transfer to an FTP
location, and update the webpage.
The things that decrease my 'fun factor' are twofold. 1)I don't seem to have a
snowball's chance of even getting a top-5 finish, let alone winning. I'm
usually last on the grid, and last in the race, only beating those who disco or
crash out. I've had people ask me why I even BOTHER if it isn't fun.
Obviously I'm going to have to take a long hard look at my future
participation.
2) Every race brings a torrent of arguments, finger-pointing, and hard
feelings. That's a hassle to wade through all the
...
read more »