Something to think about.

Well, this has certainly provoked some heated debate. (Which is no bad thing) Please be aware THERE IS NO PROPOSAL FROM ANYONE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE TO ALTER THE WEIGHT LIMIT!...The subject is on the agenda for DISCUSSION only.
As has been stated, the RFL and the ABBL both agree that the featherweight limit is 30lb (or 13.6Kg+/-). The FRA happen to have a long standing weight limit of 12Kg, which based on a majority of what is written above seems to be fine for most people. But should that be a reason for the Association not to discuss and engage in debate on the subject? I have asked that intrested members submit there views to their regional rep so these views can be brought into the discussion and taken into account.
The discussions at the meeting should produce one of four possible outcomes...

1) No agreement, therefore the limit remains at 12Kg. (but with the option to revisit this subject sometime in the future)

2) An agreement that the limit remains at 12Kg. (That would be the end of the matter)

3) A proposal to increase the weight limit to 13.6Kg (in line with the RFL / ABBL)

4) A proposal to increase the weight limit to 12.5Kg (in line with the other weight classes)

In the event of outcome 3 or 4 then a detailed proposal would be made available to the membership for a reasonable period of discussion.
It would then be put before the governing body for a formal vote, with the voting members being required to take the views of the membership into account. If approved, it would a further 3 months before any amendment would take effect.
So you can see he FRA is not about to do anything rash with regard to the featherweight weight limit.
I hope that this puts some peoples minds at rest.

Geoff.

Number 2.

Mr Stu

I will be voting proposition 2.

As well voting against any additional rules or changed rules that dont have anything to do with safety.

Yep No. 2 as well.


Chris - http://www.featherweights.org/forum

Dont know why USA and Aus changed it to 13.6kg anyway, stupid to be honest and why did they have the right to change it, it was 12kg from the start so why change it.

Well I never expected to here anything a stupid as that here. Thats something Id expect a yank to say.
How many of you have had a look at the american compititions? If you had youll notice that the weight class you are all refering to is what they call the 30lb class. The reason why america uses that weight is because they are the only country in the world who still uses the imperial measuring system (arogant fools that they are). So all their weight classes from the begining were measured in pounds. When Robot Wars started in england they need to revise the weight classes to fit with the metric system. So you changed the weight class, not them or us.
As for why the Australians changed, I wanted to go to the FRA world championships, but they got canned. At the same time I recieved an invite to compete at the Robolympics. I spread the invite around and since then Australians have been looking at travelling to america rather then england to play robots. But of corse most of us realise we arnt up to their level yet and one way to get there was to meet their weight class. That is all. Some of the builders here are still building to 12kg so they could play in england later.
Unfortuantly I still think Scarifier wouldnt last long against the yanks (or the poms either) so Im saving up for new parts and cant afford to go overseas yet. Oh and Scarifier was under 12kg at the last event it attended. I still aim for below 12kg and use the extra 1.6kg as a buffer.

Im definitely in favour of option 2.

Sadly as long as I refuse to join an organisation that uses what is in effect a block voting system for such major decisions I guess I dont have any right to express an opinion either through a regional rep or personally ;(

Such a major rule change should be decided on a one member one vote system IMHO.

2

( Number 1, go take a number 2 :) )

Tim, Geoff said:

In the event of outcome 3 or 4 then a detailed proposal would be made available to the membership for a reasonable period of discussion.
It would then be put before the governing body for a formal vote, with the voting members being required to take the views of the membership into account.

By not being a member you are only hurting yourself. You cant run your feather at events that fall under the FRA and you cant have any say in rule set changes/modifications.

I personally cant see a problem with a local rep taking the areas views into account and then taking the majorities choice/vote to the meeting. I just dont see the difference between that and an individual vote, unless Ive misunderstood what Geoff says.

Also as far as Im aware its a maximum weight limit - its not a target. Heavies weigh upto 100Kg, the most Mute has ever been is 96Kg. I certainly wouldt say Mute is at a disadvantage because it is lighter than some others.

And Id say 2 as well.

If I interpret FRA-regulations correctly then voting will happen when all points of view have been gathered and discussed. As Geoff stated that will take some time. (Now dont start comparing the FRA with a sloth ! True universal vote means time to organise the polling, to formulate the question, to count the ballots...)

I would go for option 2 as well. I am sure reasonable arrangements can be put in place when American or Australian robots come over to compete. Just as I am sure that our own robots can face their heavier opponents and walk away victorious.

By not being a member you are only hurting yourself. You cant run your feather at events that fall under the FRA and you cant have any say in rule set changes/modifications.

Which events are classed as falling under the FRA? To be honest the FRA has yet to sucessfully promote an event in its own right as far as I know. What exactly is to be gained by a self appointed governing body extorting a fee from the active competitors that are the lifeblood of the sport? The FRA surely has no mandate to either enforce rule changes or exclude non members from events that are in reality run by hard working groups of volunteers?

The event organisers and competitors keep the sport going, personally Im having a hard time working out what the FRAs real contribution is. Im left wondering how they justify their crude attempt to enforce a levy on all competitors.


I personally cant see a problem with a local rep taking the areas views into account and then taking the majorities choice/vote to the meeting. I just dont see the difference between that and an individual vote, unless Ive misunderstood what Geoff says.

Think about it for a while.

The major flaw with block voting is that the vote of the member representing 6 yes votes carries the same weight as the vote representing 20 no votes. That seems pretty warped to me!

With regions that are not holding minuted meetings there is little way of ensuring that the reps are indeed truly and accurately representing the views of their region.

Block voting always has and always will be a seriously flawed system of gauging the views of a wide membership.

Its sad that not enough time was allowed for this to be highlighted during consultation on the constitution. A body that only allows 2 days for paid up members to submit views on a draft constitution is showing scant regard for its members opinions.

Also as far as Im aware its a maximum weight limit - its not a target. Heavies weigh upto 100Kg, the most Mute has ever been is 96Kg. I certainly wouldt say Mute is at a disadvantage because it is lighter than some others.

Ed highlighted one of the major problems, an extra 1.6kg on a well designed spinning disc could leave us all taking our feathers home in binbags. Thats a pretty major disadvantage IMHO ;)

Regards

Tim jones