As of this morning, the numbers were...
United States Hang Gliding Association - 311 votes
United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association - 312 votes
So if you haven't voted in this, go do it! And I'll gladly go on record as saying it will be a public relations DISASTER if "USHGPGA" is chosen. It amazes me that people have even let this monstrosity get this far.
I'm not opposed to giving PGers their due...but this is NOT the best way to do it.
Heck, why don't we just call it it "The United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Both Without Power Aiming For Soaring Flight Association?" (USHGPGBWPAFSFA). For crying out loud, enough words in the name already!
And what the heck will we call it if the longer choice wins? "Yoosh-Guh-Puh-Guh?"
Scott
USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
Moderator: CHGPA BOD
PR
Scott,
So how exactly does adding the letter P to USHGA create a PR nightmare? As someone who is always promoting both sports, it will make my life easier. First off, PR works both ways. Disenfranchising nearly half of your members by excluding their part of the sport from the name of the club is not good PR to those pilots.
As to the general media, right now hang gliding gets a plug in any article on paragliding that mentions the national organization. Paragliding doesn't get this free plug. If the name is changed to USHGPA, paragliding will now get a mention in hang gliding articles and hang gliding will still get a mention in paragliding articles. It will also help to relieve confusion on the part of the general public in paragliding articles. Specifically, the public won't have to noodle out why paragliders are part of a hang gliding club.
From my many dealings with the media I also know that they know nothing about either sport. Thus, the name change will be insignificant. Reporters just write down the name of the club that you tell them. I think they can handle the addition of the letter P without getting writer's cramp.
CHGA didn't have any PR nightmares when we became CHGPA.
Matthew
So how exactly does adding the letter P to USHGA create a PR nightmare? As someone who is always promoting both sports, it will make my life easier. First off, PR works both ways. Disenfranchising nearly half of your members by excluding their part of the sport from the name of the club is not good PR to those pilots.
As to the general media, right now hang gliding gets a plug in any article on paragliding that mentions the national organization. Paragliding doesn't get this free plug. If the name is changed to USHGPA, paragliding will now get a mention in hang gliding articles and hang gliding will still get a mention in paragliding articles. It will also help to relieve confusion on the part of the general public in paragliding articles. Specifically, the public won't have to noodle out why paragliders are part of a hang gliding club.
From my many dealings with the media I also know that they know nothing about either sport. Thus, the name change will be insignificant. Reporters just write down the name of the club that you tell them. I think they can handle the addition of the letter P without getting writer's cramp.
CHGA didn't have any PR nightmares when we became CHGPA.
Matthew
Okay, I retract my phrase "PR nightmare." 
I don't have a problem with choosing a name more inclusive to PGers. My problem is with the issue of recognition and aesthetics. USHGPA is clumsy. It's a difficult acronym to remember. In marketing-speak, it's not catchy. (Not even remotely.) Further, nobody enjoys saying "United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association." It's long-winded and exhausting. (So is the name of our club, for that matter.)
One of the most fundamental principles in effective marketing is to reduce and distill a product/service down to its essence---a memorable word or two...a short, memorable acronym. Recall and recognition are everything. This is why we have corporations named "IBM" or "AT&T" or "Ford." This is also why we have "Nike" instead of "Nike Running Shoes and Athletic Sportswear." Just read David Ogilvy (probably the greatest marketing mind of the 20th century). He says this again and again.
Studies have shown that it takes an average of 7 (often more) viewings/hearings of a name or phrase before people who have never heard it before remember it. The more complex the name, the more reptitions are required before anyone recalls it. (Again, this has been studied a lot, and is the basis for media placement in marketing.) And in marketing, you want a name that people only have to hear once or twice to remember!
There's no reason why the name of a product/service/organization must include references to every aspect (or every constituency) of that organization. Informing people what the organization does and who it represents is the job of marketing and PR.
Now given all this, what name would I prefer? I'd suggest not leaving the name as-is. I'd suggest something shorter and more memorable that applies to both HG and PG. The name I thought was GREAT was something like the "US Skysailing Association." The word "skysailing" is beautiful, memorable, and has nothing but positive connotations. In fact, it is more descriptive of what we strive for (sailing in the sky for extended lengths of time) than the word "gliding" which suggests "sled." (I'd also remind folks that our wings are often called "sails" and they're made of the same material as sailboat sails. The parallels with sailing are many!)
Of course, "soaring" would be a better word, but then we run into problems with our sailplane cousins.
Finally, I'd even suggest dropping the word "association" from a name. Better (and more memorable) to simply say "US Skysailing" or "Skysail America" or something like that.
Comments like "then the name doesn't say what we do" miss the point. Does "Nike" say what they do? Does "McDonald's" say what they do? Of course not. Does that hurt them? No!
Scott
I don't have a problem with choosing a name more inclusive to PGers. My problem is with the issue of recognition and aesthetics. USHGPA is clumsy. It's a difficult acronym to remember. In marketing-speak, it's not catchy. (Not even remotely.) Further, nobody enjoys saying "United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association." It's long-winded and exhausting. (So is the name of our club, for that matter.)One of the most fundamental principles in effective marketing is to reduce and distill a product/service down to its essence---a memorable word or two...a short, memorable acronym. Recall and recognition are everything. This is why we have corporations named "IBM" or "AT&T" or "Ford." This is also why we have "Nike" instead of "Nike Running Shoes and Athletic Sportswear." Just read David Ogilvy (probably the greatest marketing mind of the 20th century). He says this again and again.
Studies have shown that it takes an average of 7 (often more) viewings/hearings of a name or phrase before people who have never heard it before remember it. The more complex the name, the more reptitions are required before anyone recalls it. (Again, this has been studied a lot, and is the basis for media placement in marketing.) And in marketing, you want a name that people only have to hear once or twice to remember!
There's no reason why the name of a product/service/organization must include references to every aspect (or every constituency) of that organization. Informing people what the organization does and who it represents is the job of marketing and PR.
Now given all this, what name would I prefer? I'd suggest not leaving the name as-is. I'd suggest something shorter and more memorable that applies to both HG and PG. The name I thought was GREAT was something like the "US Skysailing Association." The word "skysailing" is beautiful, memorable, and has nothing but positive connotations. In fact, it is more descriptive of what we strive for (sailing in the sky for extended lengths of time) than the word "gliding" which suggests "sled." (I'd also remind folks that our wings are often called "sails" and they're made of the same material as sailboat sails. The parallels with sailing are many!)
Of course, "soaring" would be a better word, but then we run into problems with our sailplane cousins.
Finally, I'd even suggest dropping the word "association" from a name. Better (and more memorable) to simply say "US Skysailing" or "Skysail America" or something like that.
Comments like "then the name doesn't say what we do" miss the point. Does "Nike" say what they do? Does "McDonald's" say what they do? Of course not. Does that hurt them? No!
Scott
-
batmanh3
Well Scott, as this is a democracy and every vote counts. Why don't you vote the way your heart leads you and let the process works. Its obvious that you feel strongly about the name and I'm sure there are equal and just as strong feelings demonstrated on the opposite view. If you are disenchanted with the name once the vote is tallied, than it is your choice whether to remain a member or choose to distance yourself. Voicing your opinion in the current manner will just go further to pissing off people than bringing about feelings of content. We had no real issues when we changed the name from CHGA to CHGPA other than whether to spell it Capital or Capitol. Since we don't have that many spelling issues with USHGA or USHGPA, I don't even think that will be an issue ....
C
C
Skysail
Hi Scott,
I really like the Skysailing names. The only problem with these is that there would be confusion with sailplanes. As to marketing, USHGA doesnt' really market or sell things to the general public. They sell stickers and hats and T-shirt, et cet. to members, but not to the general public. Local flight schools market and sell hang gliding to the general public. And I doubt someone will stop taking lessons at Blue Sky or Silver Wings or MD School of HG or Highland Aerosports because the national orginization is called USHGPA and not USHGA. We're the only ones who way Youshga. Besides, USHGA or USHGPA doesn't have anything to sell to the public. It's not like Nike or Pepsi or Ford. And as far as I know, the only people promoting hang gliding and paraglidng to the public are me and a couple of other freelance writers.
Matthew
I really like the Skysailing names. The only problem with these is that there would be confusion with sailplanes. As to marketing, USHGA doesnt' really market or sell things to the general public. They sell stickers and hats and T-shirt, et cet. to members, but not to the general public. Local flight schools market and sell hang gliding to the general public. And I doubt someone will stop taking lessons at Blue Sky or Silver Wings or MD School of HG or Highland Aerosports because the national orginization is called USHGPA and not USHGA. We're the only ones who way Youshga. Besides, USHGA or USHGPA doesn't have anything to sell to the public. It's not like Nike or Pepsi or Ford. And as far as I know, the only people promoting hang gliding and paraglidng to the public are me and a couple of other freelance writers.
Matthew
-
hang_pilot
- Posts: 662
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 11:13 pm
- Location: Tallahassee, FL
USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
Agreed, simplicity is the essence of branding.
?
Branding, though, is designed to set an organization’s products and services apart from the competition.? USHGA has no competition.? It is THE national association for our sport.? In choosing a name for a national association, I believe the first priority is that the members identify with the name. ?No HG or PG pilot I know thinks of himself or herself as a sky sailor!?
?
I support inclusion of paragliding in the name.?
?
~Daniel
?
?
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott [mailto:sw@shadepine.com]
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 11:01 AM
To: hg_forum@chgpa.org
Subject: USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
?
Okay, I retract my phrase "PR nightmare."
I don't have a problem with choosing a name more inclusive to PGers. My problem is with the issue of recognition and aesthetics. USHGPA is clumsy. It's a difficult acronym to remember. In marketing-speak, it's not catchy. (Not even remotely.) Further, nobody enjoys saying "United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association." It's long-winded and exhausting. (So is the name of our club, for that matter.)
One of the most fundamental principles in effective marketing is to reduce and distill a product/service down to its essence---a memorable word or two...a short, memorable acronym. Recall and recognition are everything. This is why we have corporations named "IBM" or "AT&T" or "Ford." This is also why we have "Nike" instead of "Nike Running Shoes and Athletic Sportswear." Just read David Ogilvy (probably the greatest marketing mind of the 20th century). He says this again and again.
Studies have shown that it takes an average of 7 (often more) viewings/hearings of a name or phrase before people who have never heard it before remember it. The more complex the name, the more reptitions are required before anyone recalls it. (Again, this has been studied a lot, and is the basis for media placement in marketing.) And in marketing, you want a name that people only have to hear once or twice to remember!
There's no reason why the name of a product/service/organization must include references to every aspect (or every constituency) of that organization. Informing people what the organization does and who it represents is the job of marketing and PR.
Now given all this, what name would I prefer? I'd suggest not leaving the name as-is. I'd suggest something shorter and more memorable that applies to both HG and PG. The name I thought was GREAT was something like the "US Skysailing Association." The word "skysailing" is beautiful, memorable, and has nothing but positive connotations. In fact, it is more descriptive of what we strive for (sailing in the sky for extended lengths of time) than the word "gliding" which suggests "sled." (I'd also remind folks that our wings are often called "sails" and they're made of the same material as sailboat sails. The parallels with sailing are many!)
Of course, "soaring" would be a better word, but then we run into problems with our sailplane cousins.
Finally, I'd even suggest dropping the word "association" from a name. Better (and more memorable) to simply say "US Skysailing" or "Skysail America" or something like that.
Comments like "then the name doesn't say what we do" miss the point. Does "Nike" say what they do? Does "McDonald's" say what they do? Of course not. Does that hurt them? No!
Scott
?
?
?
LEGAL DISCLAIMER
The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
?
Seeing Beyond Money is a service mark of SunTrust Banks, Inc.
[ST:XCL]
?
Branding, though, is designed to set an organization’s products and services apart from the competition.? USHGA has no competition.? It is THE national association for our sport.? In choosing a name for a national association, I believe the first priority is that the members identify with the name. ?No HG or PG pilot I know thinks of himself or herself as a sky sailor!?
?
I support inclusion of paragliding in the name.?
?
~Daniel
?
?
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott [mailto:sw@shadepine.com]
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 11:01 AM
To: hg_forum@chgpa.org
Subject: USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
?
Okay, I retract my phrase "PR nightmare."
I don't have a problem with choosing a name more inclusive to PGers. My problem is with the issue of recognition and aesthetics. USHGPA is clumsy. It's a difficult acronym to remember. In marketing-speak, it's not catchy. (Not even remotely.) Further, nobody enjoys saying "United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association." It's long-winded and exhausting. (So is the name of our club, for that matter.)One of the most fundamental principles in effective marketing is to reduce and distill a product/service down to its essence---a memorable word or two...a short, memorable acronym. Recall and recognition are everything. This is why we have corporations named "IBM" or "AT&T" or "Ford." This is also why we have "Nike" instead of "Nike Running Shoes and Athletic Sportswear." Just read David Ogilvy (probably the greatest marketing mind of the 20th century). He says this again and again.
Studies have shown that it takes an average of 7 (often more) viewings/hearings of a name or phrase before people who have never heard it before remember it. The more complex the name, the more reptitions are required before anyone recalls it. (Again, this has been studied a lot, and is the basis for media placement in marketing.) And in marketing, you want a name that people only have to hear once or twice to remember!
There's no reason why the name of a product/service/organization must include references to every aspect (or every constituency) of that organization. Informing people what the organization does and who it represents is the job of marketing and PR.
Now given all this, what name would I prefer? I'd suggest not leaving the name as-is. I'd suggest something shorter and more memorable that applies to both HG and PG. The name I thought was GREAT was something like the "US Skysailing Association." The word "skysailing" is beautiful, memorable, and has nothing but positive connotations. In fact, it is more descriptive of what we strive for (sailing in the sky for extended lengths of time) than the word "gliding" which suggests "sled." (I'd also remind folks that our wings are often called "sails" and they're made of the same material as sailboat sails. The parallels with sailing are many!)
Of course, "soaring" would be a better word, but then we run into problems with our sailplane cousins.
Finally, I'd even suggest dropping the word "association" from a name. Better (and more memorable) to simply say "US Skysailing" or "Skysail America" or something like that.
Comments like "then the name doesn't say what we do" miss the point. Does "Nike" say what they do? Does "McDonald's" say what they do? Of course not. Does that hurt them? No!
Scott
?
?
?
LEGAL DISCLAIMER
The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
?
Seeing Beyond Money is a service mark of SunTrust Banks, Inc.
[ST:XCL]
Okay, I can live with USHGPA.
Chris, I'm not trying to piss people off (and am sorry if I do)---I was only expressing my opinion and trying to provide sound reasons for it. (I hope that's okay here---if people can't stand hearing opposing viewpoints without getting mad, we've got a problem as an organization!)
Matthew and Daniel expressed some sound reasons in support of USHGPA, which I appreciate. They didn't seem angry.
Scott
PS - One more question Chris---and I'm not being sarcastic. If voicing my opinion in the current manner goes further to pissing off people, then how am I supposed to voice it? Should I provide more facts? Reference specific sources? Or should I simply not voice my opinion...meaning we should just censor the forum?
I'm not mad---just baffled as to why expressing an opinion and supporting it would piss people off?
Chris, I'm not trying to piss people off (and am sorry if I do)---I was only expressing my opinion and trying to provide sound reasons for it. (I hope that's okay here---if people can't stand hearing opposing viewpoints without getting mad, we've got a problem as an organization!)
Matthew and Daniel expressed some sound reasons in support of USHGPA, which I appreciate. They didn't seem angry.
Scott
PS - One more question Chris---and I'm not being sarcastic. If voicing my opinion in the current manner goes further to pissing off people, then how am I supposed to voice it? Should I provide more facts? Reference specific sources? Or should I simply not voice my opinion...meaning we should just censor the forum?
I'm not mad---just baffled as to why expressing an opinion and supporting it would piss people off?
A Rose By Any Other Name...
... will still prick your finger.
Renames!
Splinter Groups!
Competitors!
Drinking Clubs!
Society of Old Aeronautical Reprobates
Gathering Like Idiots Demanding External Recognition Symbolism
Foot Launch Aviation Religious Experience
Council on Learning Experimental Aviation Requirements
Washington Insiders National Gliding Society
Aerotow Experts Requiring Oversight Totally Unorganized Group
=========
let the compeition begin!
craign
(ooops. did he say prick? can he do that here? Don't go there, Brian! Chris, you leave therest of that sentence alone, too!)
Renames!
Splinter Groups!
Competitors!
Drinking Clubs!
Society of Old Aeronautical Reprobates
Gathering Like Idiots Demanding External Recognition Symbolism
Foot Launch Aviation Religious Experience
Council on Learning Experimental Aviation Requirements
Washington Insiders National Gliding Society
Aerotow Experts Requiring Oversight Totally Unorganized Group
=========
let the compeition begin!
craign
(ooops. did he say prick? can he do that here? Don't go there, Brian! Chris, you leave therest of that sentence alone, too!)
Scott, Thanks for the reminder. I voted Against the change. It's just one more stupid thing USHGA is spending time/money on.
Rance
PS: "strident", isn't that the name of a chewing gum?
You have nothing to apologize for.
Rance
PS: "strident", isn't that the name of a chewing gum?
You have nothing to apologize for. Scott wrote:Okay, Chris and others...my first post was definitely strident.
Scott
USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
?
They should be spending some of that money on National Teams funding instead!
?
Kev C
From: rancerupp [mailto:rupps@truevine.net]
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 5:39 AM
To: hg_forum@chgpa.org
Subject: USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
?
Scott, Thanks for the reminder. I voted Against the change. It's just one more stupid thing USHGA is spending time/money on.
Rance
PS: "strident", isn't that the name of a chewing gum?
You have nothing to apologize for.
Scott wrote:
Okay, Chris and others...my first post was definitely strident.
Scott
They should be spending some of that money on National Teams funding instead!
?
Kev C
From: rancerupp [mailto:rupps@truevine.net]
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 5:39 AM
To: hg_forum@chgpa.org
Subject: USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
?
Scott, Thanks for the reminder. I voted Against the change. It's just one more stupid thing USHGA is spending time/money on.
Rance
PS: "strident", isn't that the name of a chewing gum?
You have nothing to apologize for. Scott wrote:
Okay, Chris and others...my first post was definitely strident.
Scott
-
hepcat1989
- Posts: 684
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 11:15 pm
I don't give a rat's what it is called.We as pilots, hang and para alike fly the same air, use the same sites, and reley on the same people to retrieve us. I have had paragliders on my wing crew.I have been retrieved by paragliders, as well I have retrieved paragliders. Have you?So yes, A "P" should be incorporated in the name.Or, maybe- the back bitin, flea scratchin,tick flickin exploits of people that fly those thingies association BBFSTFEPTFTTA or something. Enjoy your 4th. Shawn.
I've retrieved as many paragliders as I've retrieved hang gliders. I assist with as much vigor any paraglider as I do any hang glider. I don't have a prejudice for helping or including them in the organization one way or another.
I DO, however have a problem with having to cater to the whims of every group (large or small) that comes along, whether the power guys(PH), the bag guys(PG), or the plumbing guys(HG). I've heard multiple arguments for including the PH's WITHOUT changing the AOI. As I understand it, we currently include a FULL program for the PG's equal to the HG's. If a group becomes so big that they want to have their own name, then why don't they start their own group? I'm all for that. No, they want to mooch off another group when they are small and then just take them over when they grow up.
Do we really have to change the name (an Icon in the industry) to make any particular group feel fully welcome? I think not. What happens when the next thing coming down the pike gets big like PG has done. Are we gonna have to cater to their whim as well? I'M AGAINST POLITICAL CORRECTNESS and plan on staying that way. Although we all need to have a little compassion for those unlike ourselves, folks also need to suck it up and realize that life is NOT fair.
The best suggestion I've heard over the past two years would be to have a main organization (such as the existing EAA) serve as the umbrella organization with Homebuilts, Sailplanes, HG, PG, PH/PPG, etc. falling under their jurisdiction. The power of numbers then works to ALL our advantage with the individualization existing as well.
Rance
I DO, however have a problem with having to cater to the whims of every group (large or small) that comes along, whether the power guys(PH), the bag guys(PG), or the plumbing guys(HG). I've heard multiple arguments for including the PH's WITHOUT changing the AOI. As I understand it, we currently include a FULL program for the PG's equal to the HG's. If a group becomes so big that they want to have their own name, then why don't they start their own group? I'm all for that. No, they want to mooch off another group when they are small and then just take them over when they grow up.
Do we really have to change the name (an Icon in the industry) to make any particular group feel fully welcome? I think not. What happens when the next thing coming down the pike gets big like PG has done. Are we gonna have to cater to their whim as well? I'M AGAINST POLITICAL CORRECTNESS and plan on staying that way. Although we all need to have a little compassion for those unlike ourselves, folks also need to suck it up and realize that life is NOT fair.
The best suggestion I've heard over the past two years would be to have a main organization (such as the existing EAA) serve as the umbrella organization with Homebuilts, Sailplanes, HG, PG, PH/PPG, etc. falling under their jurisdiction. The power of numbers then works to ALL our advantage with the individualization existing as well.
Rance
USHGPA
First off. Never knew that USHGA was an Icon in the aviation field. Most GA pilots don't even know we exist.
Second. USHGA membership was down to half the early day numbers and not doing that well until they decided to bring PG pilots into the fold in the 80s. Thus the addition of the PG pilots returned USGHA to sound financial footing. USHGA might not be around now if it wasn't for the PG pilots.
Matthew
Second. USHGA membership was down to half the early day numbers and not doing that well until they decided to bring PG pilots into the fold in the 80s. Thus the addition of the PG pilots returned USGHA to sound financial footing. USHGA might not be around now if it wasn't for the PG pilots.
Matthew
USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
Many years ago a guy called Rich Donohue had a good idea: given the use of
ultralights in towing, the hang gliding and ultralight community had alot
in common. He went so far as to make contact with the president of the
ultralight association (who was also a hang glider pilot with decades of
experience) and convince him to come speak at a capital club meeting.
The club decided not to invite him to speak. Why? I'm not completely
sure, but I think it had alot to do with Rich hammering away at the topic
so much that people just wanted to shut him out. You really do hurt
yourself by arguing a point too much - just annoys people to the point
that you finally lose the argument by default.
Rich's comment to the proposed speaker when he found he had been cancelled
was "They wanted to spank me and they hit you."
Brian Vant-Hull
301-646-1149
On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Scott wrote:
> PS - One more question Chris---and I'm not being sarcastic. If voicing my opinion in the current manner goes further to pissing off people, then how am I supposed to voice it? Should I provide more facts? Reference specific sources? Or should I simply not voice my opinion...meaning we should just censor the forum?
>
> I'm not mad---just baffled as to why expressing an opinion and supporting it would piss people off?
ultralights in towing, the hang gliding and ultralight community had alot
in common. He went so far as to make contact with the president of the
ultralight association (who was also a hang glider pilot with decades of
experience) and convince him to come speak at a capital club meeting.
The club decided not to invite him to speak. Why? I'm not completely
sure, but I think it had alot to do with Rich hammering away at the topic
so much that people just wanted to shut him out. You really do hurt
yourself by arguing a point too much - just annoys people to the point
that you finally lose the argument by default.
Rich's comment to the proposed speaker when he found he had been cancelled
was "They wanted to spank me and they hit you."
Brian Vant-Hull
301-646-1149
On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Scott wrote:
> PS - One more question Chris---and I'm not being sarcastic. If voicing my opinion in the current manner goes further to pissing off people, then how am I supposed to voice it? Should I provide more facts? Reference specific sources? Or should I simply not voice my opinion...meaning we should just censor the forum?
>
> I'm not mad---just baffled as to why expressing an opinion and supporting it would piss people off?
USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
And the guy you're talking about is John Ballantyne,
probably one of the most interesting, fascinating and
knowledgeable aviation guys around. Started two HG
schools in California, started the USUA, is the first
ligth sport aviation weight shift FAA examiner. And
my trike instructor. You guys really missed out not
having him speak!
Z
--- Vant-Hull - Brian <brianvh@umd5.umd.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Many years ago a guy called Rich Donohue had a good
> idea: given the use of
> ultralights in towing, the hang gliding and
> ultralight community had alot
> in common. He went so far as to make contact with
> the president of the
> ultralight association (who was also a hang glider
> pilot with decades of
> experience) and convince him to come speak at a
> capital club meeting.
>
> The club decided not to invite him to speak. Why?
> I'm not completely
> sure, but I think it had alot to do with Rich
> hammering away at the topic
> so much that people just wanted to shut him out.
> You really do hurt
> yourself by arguing a point too much - just annoys
> people to the point
> that you finally lose the argument by default.
>
> Rich's comment to the proposed speaker when he found
> he had been cancelled
> was "They wanted to spank me and they hit you."
>
> Brian Vant-Hull
> 301-646-1149
>
> On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Scott wrote:
>
> > PS - One more question Chris---and I'm not being
> sarcastic. If voicing my opinion in the current
> manner goes further to pissing off people, then how
> am I supposed to voice it? Should I provide more
> facts? Reference specific sources? Or should I
> simply not voice my opinion...meaning we should just
> censor the forum?
> >
> > I'm not mad---just baffled as to why expressing an
> opinion and supporting it would piss people off?
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
probably one of the most interesting, fascinating and
knowledgeable aviation guys around. Started two HG
schools in California, started the USUA, is the first
ligth sport aviation weight shift FAA examiner. And
my trike instructor. You guys really missed out not
having him speak!
Z
--- Vant-Hull - Brian <brianvh@umd5.umd.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Many years ago a guy called Rich Donohue had a good
> idea: given the use of
> ultralights in towing, the hang gliding and
> ultralight community had alot
> in common. He went so far as to make contact with
> the president of the
> ultralight association (who was also a hang glider
> pilot with decades of
> experience) and convince him to come speak at a
> capital club meeting.
>
> The club decided not to invite him to speak. Why?
> I'm not completely
> sure, but I think it had alot to do with Rich
> hammering away at the topic
> so much that people just wanted to shut him out.
> You really do hurt
> yourself by arguing a point too much - just annoys
> people to the point
> that you finally lose the argument by default.
>
> Rich's comment to the proposed speaker when he found
> he had been cancelled
> was "They wanted to spank me and they hit you."
>
> Brian Vant-Hull
> 301-646-1149
>
> On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Scott wrote:
>
> > PS - One more question Chris---and I'm not being
> sarcastic. If voicing my opinion in the current
> manner goes further to pissing off people, then how
> am I supposed to voice it? Should I provide more
> facts? Reference specific sources? Or should I
> simply not voice my opinion...meaning we should just
> censor the forum?
> >
> > I'm not mad---just baffled as to why expressing an
> opinion and supporting it would piss people off?
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
That's a sad story Brian. As for hurting oneself by arguing a point too much, that's sad too...it usually happens when people are too lazy to debate anything intelligently, and don't want anyone to "rock the boat," ever!brianvh wrote:You really do hurt yourself by arguing a point too much - just annoys people to the point that you finally lose the argument by default.
Scott
-
hepcat1989
- Posts: 684
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 11:15 pm
Hey Rance,
I don't get the humor ... sonds like 'name calling'.
Shawn makes a good point. It is just a silly name. USHGA is not my name and my feelings won't be hurt if they change it . My love for the sport(s) has nothing to do with the name. I could argue for it, or against it. I'll keep flying regardless of the name.
I hope this stupid name change thing doesn't generate the kind of animosity we see on the national list.
I don't get the humor ... sonds like 'name calling'.
Shawn makes a good point. It is just a silly name. USHGA is not my name and my feelings won't be hurt if they change it . My love for the sport(s) has nothing to do with the name. I could argue for it, or against it. I'll keep flying regardless of the name.
I hope this stupid name change thing doesn't generate the kind of animosity we see on the national list.
rancerupp wrote:Yeah, good one Shawn.
'Spark
-
Flying Lobster
- Posts: 1042
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 4:17 pm
Re: USHGA name change: a CLOSE race!
You sure about that? I know that Rich has been a vocal opponent of the inclusion of any kind of power within the USHGA fold.brianvh wrote:Many years ago a guy called Rich Donohue had a good idea: given the use of
ultralights in towing, the hang gliding and ultralight community had alot
in common. He went so far as to make contact with the president of the
ultralight association (who was also a hang glider pilot with decades of
experience) and convince him to come speak at a capital club meeting.
The club decided not to invite him to speak. Why? I'm not completely
sure, but I think it had alot to do with Rich hammering away at the topic
so much that people just wanted to shut him out. You really do hurt
yourself by arguing a point too much - just annoys people to the point
that you finally lose the argument by default.
Rich's comment to the proposed speaker when he found he had been cancelled
was "They wanted to spank me and they hit you."
Brian Vant-Hull
301-646-1149
On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Scott wrote:
> PS - One more question Chris---and I'm not being sarcastic. If voicing my opinion in the current manner goes further to pissing off people, then how am I supposed to voice it? Should I provide more facts? Reference specific sources? Or should I simply not voice my opinion...meaning we should just censor the forum?
>
> I'm not mad---just baffled as to why expressing an opinion and supporting it would piss people off?
marc
Great Googly-moo!
Spark,
Please note the smilies. It was a concrete way of showing Shawn (and others) part of what a name is. Even if it is a mere 'non-living' organization, it was organized by folks that chose the name for specific reasons. I'll be the first to say that I couldn't begin to understand all the meaning of WHY they chose 'USHGA'. Although I would be willing to bet that most of them would be appauled that a related group (PG in the current case) wanted to change the name of the org. The power folks (or other group) could eventually want to do the same. Should we pander to all new groups when they come along? Maybe just some? But which ones?
If the tables were turned, as a HG pilot, I would not join a related sport and expect them to change the name of 'Their' org. just to pander to my 'feelings' of inclusion. As I see this whole fiasco, it comes down to nothing more than 'Political Correctness'.
I think most of the founders (and about half the members) would also disagree.
I rarely read that list anymore for just that reason.
Rance
No name-calling was intended. Just trying to make the point a little more tangible to those that think this whole argument is so superficial.Spark wrote:Hey Rance,
I don't get the humor ... sonds like 'name calling'.
Please note the smilies. It was a concrete way of showing Shawn (and others) part of what a name is. Even if it is a mere 'non-living' organization, it was organized by folks that chose the name for specific reasons. I'll be the first to say that I couldn't begin to understand all the meaning of WHY they chose 'USHGA'. Although I would be willing to bet that most of them would be appauled that a related group (PG in the current case) wanted to change the name of the org. The power folks (or other group) could eventually want to do the same. Should we pander to all new groups when they come along? Maybe just some? But which ones? If the tables were turned, as a HG pilot, I would not join a related sport and expect them to change the name of 'Their' org. just to pander to my 'feelings' of inclusion. As I see this whole fiasco, it comes down to nothing more than 'Political Correctness'.
My comment earlier was actually sarcastic. Actually I disagree.Spark wrote:Shawn makes a good point. It is just a silly name.
I think most of the founders (and about half the members) would also disagree. So what reasons do you see for keeping it as it is? As hard as I try, I can't honestly come up with any good reasons to change the name.Spark wrote:I could argue for it, or against it.
I wholeheartedly agree!Spark wrote:I hope this stupid name change thing doesn't generate the kind of animosity we see on the national list.
I rarely read that list anymore for just that reason. Rance