<This ride must have AERC approval for santioning regardless of money because
<is requires horses to qualify to enter.
<
<LET YOUR DIRECTORS KNOW NOW!!!
>I would also point out that this message also incorrectly states that our
>event has not had sanctioning approval and directs readers so inclined to
>"LET YOUR DIRECTORS KNOW NOW!!!" and "Turns out this ride has not ahd
>sanctioning approval yet and must be voted on by YOUR directors!!!"
>Well for those of us that have read our recent posts, we have seen that this
>event is indeed sanctioned, has been since June 96, and that the vote has to
>do with RIDE MANAGEMENT's request for special prerequisites of the 100 mile
>competitors. We weren't required to ask for this, it was just the
responsible
>thing to do.
>As for the statement "Our director was NOT aware of the money offered. I
>don't know if AERC is aware." I was unaware that I was expected to ensure
>each and every director was made aware of any issue, I figured that was a
>function of the AERC administration offices and their accepted procedures.
As
>to whether AERC was aware. I'm pretty sure they understood the content of
the
>legibly typed letter we sent, and subsequent phone conversations ( hardly
any
>static... no vacuum cleaners running in the background ) explaining our
>desire to request the attendance of an AERC ride steward due to prizes
being
>in excess of $1,000.00 as required per AERC rules.
Well, no, the ride was NOT entirely sanctioned as it was changed. It was
listed as Mouse Mountain...sounds NOTHING like Cossequin Challenge to me. The
ride is still pending approval of the 100 mile division because it requires
horses to qualify. AND, merely stating that you will comply with AERC rules
because money in excess of $1,000 does NOT mean that anyone was adequately
informed. From what you have posted so far, it looks like ride management
tried to "put one over" on everybody by "sneaking this by" AERC..i.e.
shooting first, then asking questions. Is the pot calling the kettle
black???
Sorry Tracy...you ARE a jerk..for taking this so personally. I did not
really know you before, but I feel I am getting to know you now and I don't
like it.
The bottom line is when money is involved, ideas, concepts, goals and
integrity get questioned and compromised. You are letting this happen to
yourself. Admittedly, some earlier posts were reactionary...reaction to
SHOCK. The majority of posts are sane, logical and presented with reason and
concern.
If you are a business person, read up on your courses in personnel
management. If you are in sales, read up on how to clinch the sale. If you
are representing the ride mangement of the Cossequin Challenge, you have
obeyed the law of "The Peter Principle"
Nobody started out wanted to dislike you, but you are making it very easy.
Go home, take a stiff drink (or whatever relaxes you), rethink your strategy
and reapproach this group with concrete plans and forcasts to convince us
that what YOU believe is what we should believe. In your position, you would
be far better of playing the part of politician. Use fact and reason to
negotiate your stand. You have a right to your thoughts just as we do and
blaming will not bring us forward to a rational conclusion.
I did not start out wanting to ban this ride..in fact, many of us heard of it
through Valerie many months ago and supported the idea. NO ONE here knew
until the flyer was handed out that money was involved. You want ME to be
"upfront"!!! How about input from riders in this organization?? A new idea;
good, bad or indifferent, will always be met with opposition, Be prepared to
handle it diplomatically and convincingly.
The best defense not NOT a good offense!!!
Teddy