Fwd: ride managers

[BMcCrary27@aol.com]

In a message dated 02/20/2000 10:48:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, BMcCrary27 
writes:

 In a message dated 02/19/2000 3:27:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
TOS@htcomp.net writes:
 
 << also, (to a point) keeps 'conflict of interest' from
  rearing it's ugly head, in case of certian problems.
   >>
 
 I agree.  I remember once on what has now become "our" ride, the head vet's 
girlfriend rode.  Don't you just think the other riders called THIS a 
conflict of interest!  I HAVE ridden one of our own rides rarely, but I 
accept the breaks just like any other rider.  I think the main point the 
other writer was trying to make is that a non-riding alternate ride manager 
should either not have to be an AERC member or be given a reduced rate for 
membership. 
 I don't see why this should be.  It suggests that a ride manager who wants 
to ride his own ride can just draft ANYONE into the day manager job and 
everything will go fine.
 
 Barbara 


---- Begin included message ----

• To: TOS@htcomp.net
• Subject: Re: ride managers
• From: BMcCrary27@aol.com
• Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 13:48:26 EST
• Full-name: BMcCrary27

In a message dated 02/19/2000 3:27:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
TOS@htcomp.net writes:

<< also, (to a point) keeps 'conflict of interest' from
 rearing it's ugly head, in case of certian problems.
  >>

I agree.  I remember once on what has now become "our" ride, the head vet's 
girlfriend rode.  Don't you just think the other riders called THIS a 
conflict of interest!  I HAVE ridden one of our own rides rarely, but I 
accept the breaks just like any other rider.  I think the main point the 
other writer was trying to make is that a non-riding alternate ride manager 
should either not have to be an AERC member or be given a reduced rate for 
membership. 
I don't see why this should be.  It suggests that a ride manager who wants to 
ride his own ride can just draft ANYONE into the day manager job and 
everything will go fine.

Barbara

---- End included message ----