worst red light debate, again!

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

Bill, your a tad slow if you don't get that most don't agree with you, or even care. Do you have any idea how many are laughing at your little crusade? Just keep asking your repetitive little questions. You don't like the answers you get, so you just keep asking them. Over , and over, and over, and over........
I don't owe you a response every time you put up a 47 paragraph post. Get over yourself. Once more, simply posting on Internet message boards won't change anything.

ED,

Faster cars have been enjoying a "hand out" since 1963 (the FREE RIDE if their competitor "bulbs.")

If that isn't a "hand out," I don't know what is....
Where is your objection to THAT "hand out"?????

That is a question I have never asked you before, and one I'd like to have an answer to. This sort of thing is repetitive because you consistently fail to answer such questions because you HAVE no answer. This current red light rule is what they would say in a court of law, "indefensible." Any defense you could muster would show it to be an unfair rule, brought about as the result of a technical failure (no technology that could deal with it at the time,)
but, that is no longer the case.

So, how about it; since you haven't answered the question (or, any other) before, tell me, why don't you object to the "free ride" the second-to-leave car receives if the first car bulbs???
It won't be repititious because you've never answered it, so you can't use that cop-out as a reason not to answer it.

So, what's your reason????

If you just can't find an answer in your overtaxed brain, tell me this:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Ed said:
"I don't need handouts."


Ed, explain to ME (not Jim,) where's the "handout" for a rule that treats EVERYBODY THE SAME, instead of favoring one segment over the other, like it is, now????

You have NEVER told me what there is about a "worse red light rule" that qualifies it for being labeled a "handout."

It's the same for every racer. EVERYBODY gets a chance to red light.

Where's the "handout"??????????

I really would like to know what there is about a rule that's the same for everybody, that compels you to call it a "handout."

Tell me, Jim Wahl, Mark and Mr. Kelley what you think about this, using the word "handout" in a sentence describing how it would affect you, for instance.

Thanks.

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

ED,

Faster cars have been enjoying a "hand out" since 1963 (the FREE RIDE if their competitor "bulbs.")

If that isn't a "hand out," I don't know what is....
Where is your objection to THAT "hand out"?????

That is a question I have never asked you before, and one I'd like to have an answer to. This sort of thing is repetitive because you consistently fail to answer such questions because you HAVE no answer. This current red light rule is what they would say in a court of law, "indefensible." Any defense you could muster would show it to be an unfair rule, brought about as the result of a technical failure (no trechnology that could deal with it at the time,)
but, that is no longer the case.

So, how about it; since you haven't answered the question (or, any other) before, tell me, why don't you object to the "free ride" the second-to-leave car receives if the first car bulbs???
It won't be repititious because you've never answered it, so you can't use that cop-out as a reason not to answer it.

So, what's your reason????

If you just can't find an answer in your overtaxed brain, tell me this:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Ed saID:
"I don't need handouts."


Ed, explain to ME (not Jim,) where's the "handout" for a rule that treats EVERYBODY THE SAME, instead of favoring one segment over the other, like it is, now????

You have NEVER told me what there is about a "worse red light rule" that qualifies it for being labeled a "handout."

It's the same for every racer. EVERYBODY gets a chance to red light.

Where's the "handout"??????????

I really would like to know what there is about a rule that's the same for everybody, that compels you to call it a "handout."

Tell me, Jim Wahl, Mark and Mr. Kelley what you think about this, using the word "handout" in a sentence describing how it would affect you, for instance.

Thanks.

You must be a real peach to live with.If a bull$hit subject like this has you in such a tizzie,I can just imagine how you would handle a real crisis.You are a scary individual.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

You must be a real peach to live with.If a bull$hit subject like this has you in such a tizzie,I can just imagine how you would handle a real crisis.You are a scary individual.

KILL THE MESSENGER!!!

All I did was ask you to answer two simple questions, and you turn into a babbling pseudo-psychoanalyst.

Just answer the questions, Ed.

If you don't, you're only proving that everything I said was true.

Oh; that was the other ED.

Well, I've never seen both of you in the same room at the same time.

Can't tell the players without a program.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

You must be a real peach to live with.If a bull$hit subject like this has you in such a tizzie,I can just imagine how you would handle a real crisis.You are a scary individual.

If you think that a subject concerning a rule that gives an advantage to some racers, but not others, is "bull$****," You're dumber that I think you are....

If you want to prove me wrong, just answer the two questions I asked Ed Wright, (in post 651) since I can no longer tell you two apart.

Waiting....

[Ed Fernandez]

Originally Posted by bill dedman

If you think that a subject concerning a rule that gives an advantage to some racers, but not others, is "bull$****," You're dumber that I think you are....

If you want to prove me wrong, just answer the two questions I asked Ed Wright, (in post 651) since I can no longer tell you two apart.

Waiting....

My answer is:



Uhh Bill,you've been obcessing over this since April 22nd.(Round two).Who's dumb?????????
Actually I'm having fun and you're nuts.Tomorrow I'll be serious and you'll still be nuts.Sad sad life.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

My answer is:



Uhh Bill,you've been obcessing over this since April 22nd.(Round two).Who's dumb?????????
Actually I'm having fun and you're nuts.Tomorrow I'll be serious and you'll still be nuts.Sad sad life.

Who's dumb?

A guy who spells OBSESSING with a C...



No, Ed, what's sad is that you have been right there with me, every step of the way, and still can't answer even the simplest, most basic questions about this discussion... because you know that IF YOU DO, you won't have an argument any more. And everyone knows it.

Now, THAT'S SAD.

[bill dedman]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

My answer is:



Uhh Bill,you've been obcessing over this since April 22nd.(Round two).Who's dumb?????????
Actually I'm having fun and you're nuts.Tomorrow I'll be serious and you'll still be nuts.Sad sad life.

And, you'll still not be willing OR able to anwer the two simple questions I asked...

Jeff; as far as "demonizing" somebody goes, how about this comment about me, from Ed:

"You are a scary individual."
How's that for a free psychoanalysis from a guy who thinks "obsessing" has a "C" in it...

This from one of the two ED's who refuse to answer for calling this new rule, a "handout," which it is not...

If YOU think it's a "handout," maybe you could answer for them... they obviously can't.

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

You must be a real peach to live with.If a bull$hit subject like this has you in such a tizzie,I can just imagine how you would handle a real crisis.You are a scary individual.

Like... whose turn is it to take out the trash? That kind of dilemma? Or it's not fair that I should clean the toilets because I took out the trash three times more than I should have last month? Or because I'm busy on the keyboards and it's not fair that I should stop to let the dog out? I agree, I can't imagine successfully handling such crisis.

Bill, speaking of demonizing, is it something like this:

"You're dumber that I think you are...."

or this:

"As far as NHRA/IHRA goes, I don't run a Class car right now, and the "quality" of people that I would be talking to at the "HRA's", don't have the perspective beyond "the company line" to entertain "outside the box" ideas from non-NHRA/IHRA racers, especially (given their financial state of affairs,) ideas that are going to cost them money (no matter, how little.)"

Well at least you FINALLY got somebody to write that darn letter for you. All you have to do is fill in the blanks. Are you waiting for free postage now?

[Jim Wahl]

Since none of the two Ed's or Jeff can communicate a real reason that they oppose Bill's "worse red light" rule and yet have such a passionate negativity for it, it leads me to believe, in my professional opinion, that they could be suffering from what it known as metathesiophobia, commonly refered to "the fear of change". They (particularly the two Ed's) exhibit the common symptoms of:

1. A feeling of uncontrollable anxiety when you think about or are exposed to changes.

2. The feeling that you must do everything possible to avoid changes.

3. The inability to function normally because of your anxiety.

4. The knowledge that your fears are unreasonable or exaggerated but feeling powerless to control them.

I have a friend who has a great website dedicated to just this phobia and I will insert it just as soon as I can find it so that you guys can begin to get some help confronting this problem. Some good reading and I hope it will help you to confront your inner demons.

Here you go:
http://www.phobia-fear-release.com/m...siophobia.html

Bill, I would suggest that you no longer continue the banter with these guys as it has become very obvious to most people who have followed this thread that they do not have anything to useful contribute to the conversation and are just feeding off of your justifiable frustration. I have received many positive emails and would enjoy communicating with you one on one to plan a strategy on this "worse red light" situation. Feel good in the fact that there are many out there who agree with you, if for no other reason but to bring consistency to the rules, and would post just that here but do not feel like being beaten up for voicing their opinions. Me, I have thick skin and I love to try to improve the system! Jim

jimwahl@embarqmail.com

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Jim Wahl

Since none of the two Ed's or Jeff can communicate a real reason that they oppose Bill's "worse red light" rule and yet have such a passionate negativity for it, it leads me to believe, in my professional opinion, that they could be suffering from what it known as metathesiophobia, commonly refered to "the fear of change". They (particularly the two Ed's) exhibit the common symptoms of:

1. A feeling of uncontrollable anxiety when you think about or are exposed to changes.

2. The feeling that you must do everything possible to avoid changes.

3. The inability to function normally because of your anxiety.

4. The knowledge that your fears are unreasonable or exaggerated but feeling powerless to control them.

I have a friend who has a great website dedicated to just this phobia and I will insert it just as soon as I can find it so that you guys can begin to get some help confronting this problem. Some good reading and I hope it will help you to confront your inner demons.

Here you go:
http://www.phobia-fear-release.com/m...siophobia.html

Bill, I would suggest that you no longer continue the banter with these guys as it has become very obvious to most people who have followed this thread that they do not have anything to useful contribute to the conversation and are just feeding off of your justifiable frustration. I have received many positive emails and would enjoy communicating with you one on one to plan a strategy on this "worse red light" situation. Feel good in the fact that there are many out there who agree with you, if for no other reason but to bring consistency to the rules, and would post just that here but do not feel like being beaten up for voicing their opinions. Me, I have thick skin and I love to try to improve the system! Jim

jimwahl@embarqmail.com

No Jim
No Bill

I have given a reason more than once. If I give a reason and you fail to recognize it as such, you either disagree with it and refuse to recognize it as valid or you refuse to recognize it because it just might make sense. NHRA told me it made sense and it took all of 3 seconds for the NHRA Glendora based official (that would be management level, rule maker type, not the janitor or receptionist type). Either way, it appears to me you want to bury any opposition with page after page of the same rhetoric and the same "repeat after me mantras." I do not have the time or desire to repeat it again. Hell I don't have the time to read the posts on this subject from the last 5 hours. My comments are posted here more than once, find it and study it because I'm not looking for it and I surely don't have the time to type out 300 paragraphs a day that say the same thing over and over again. So if you don't get it then stay focused on the mantra. "red light not fair, red light not fair..."